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.
INSIGHT: Foreign policy implications of Jakarta's election
Aside from the social and political implications others have noted, the Jakarta election also affects Indonesia’s foreign policy.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Incumbent gubernatorial candidate Basuki "Ahok" Tjahaja Purnama and gubernatorian candidate Anies Baswedan greet each other before debating at the Bidakara Hotel in Jakarta on April 12. The debate was the last official one held by the DKI Jakarta Election Commision ahead of the runoff election. (JP/Seto Wardhana.)
T
he Jakarta gubernatorial election is now mercifully over, although Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama remains behind bars under trumped-up charges. But politically driven sectarian mobilization and attacks against minorities will have long-lasting consequences.
Aside from the social and political implications others have noted, the Jakarta election also affects Indonesia’s foreign policy.
First, the sectarian mobilization and the criminalization of politics before, during and after the campaign could undermine Indonesia’s regional and global standing. They certainly bring into question Indonesia’s credentials of combining democratic stability with a moderate and tolerant brand of Islam.
This model of a “democratic, moderate Islam” has been among Indonesia’s sources of soft power, which Joseph Nye defines as a country’s ability to obtain international political outcomes because other countries want to follow it, admire its values and emulate its example. Certainly, Jakarta’s success with the ASEAN Political Security Community project, for example, or the Bali Democracy Forum, rested on these soft power assumptions built around the model.
Indeed, studies examining Indonesia’s rising regional and global profile under the Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono administration (2004 to 2014) underlined the importance of continuing the country’s democratic consolidation process while containing sectarian and centrifugal forces that almost tore it apart following the end of authoritarian rule.
That those same destructive forces are now manipulated in such a high-profile and crass manner in perhaps one of the most consequential local elections will leave a scorching impression among our regional neighbors and global friends.
Some might argue that their concerns are inappropriate as the election is part of Indonesia’s “internal affairs.” Given Indonesia’s economic promise and geopolitical significance, others might say, “Who cares what the world thinks of a single local election?”
