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 : Friendship and cooperation the Indo-Pacific: Will a treaty help?
In a recent speech at a conference on Indonesia organized by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC, Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa called for an Indo-Pacific-wide treaty of friendship and cooperation
Change Size
I
n a recent speech at a conference on Indonesia organized by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC, Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa called for an Indo-Pacific-wide treaty of friendship and cooperation. Marty argued a treaty was necessary if the region was to maintain peace and stability in conditions he often refers to as 'dynamic equilibrium'.
This throws up two questions: What does he mean and what purpose will it serve? If you read media reports, judge the proposal in the context it was delivered and try to relate it to the geographical area, Marty's proposed treaty is easily misunderstood.
For example, the 'Indo-Pacific' concept is used more commonly in the US and Australia rather than Asia, and Marty's idea was delivered in Washington. A suspicious mind might be tempted to ask whether the proposal reflects anything more than Indonesia's attempt to align its position with that of the US.
Never underestimate Indonesia's commitment and adherence to a bebas-aktif (free and active) foreign policy! It would be naïve to suggest that the proposal was made to support or counter anything specific. On the contrary, the proposal is a sign of concern about the geo-political future of the region and Indonesia's place in it. As Marty sees it, three problems ' trust deficit, territorial disputes and strategic changes ' could undermine peace, security and the promise of prosperity in the region, if not managed properly.
The proposal clearly seeks to extend the ASEAN model of regional security into a wider region beyond Southeast Asia. For ASEAN, this undertaking is certainly not new, as they have been working in that direction since the establishment of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1993. It also reflects Indonesia's commitment to ASEAN centrality in managing the changing strategic environment. The ASEAN+ formula (the post-ministerial conference, ASEAN+3, the ARF, the East Asia summit, etc.) represent the expansion of the ASEAN model of security cooperation into an East Asian context.
The emphasis is on the importance of norms, rather than legal rules, for the management of international relations. Like all ASEAN members, Indonesia strongly believes that norms are important in shaping state behavior. The treaty of friendship and cooperation which Marty envisages revolves around ASEAN norms ' confidence building, peaceful resolution of disputes and security ' and reflects his preference for norm-based regional order. It is not surprising that the proposal for a treaty of 'friendship and cooperation' echoes the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia.
Indonesia is not blind to the reality of international relations in East Asia. Norms may be necessary for the management of international relations, they are not sufficient. Marty's hobbyhorse of 'dynamic equilibrium' shows he has no doubts about the imperfect nature of world politics where power defines relations.
International relations based on power alone would lead to pure power politics with devastating implications for regional stability. In this context, the Indo-Pacific treaty could provide a framework for the 'dynamic equilibrium' that Marty seeks to establish.
The idea behind the treaty is doubtless a noble one, but it needs further discussion.
One area that needs further elaboration is the treaty's third goal, namely peaceful management of strategic change. In the Indo-Pacific, the need to manage change is a classic problem in international relations: How to ensure that the rise of new power(s) is not at the expense of others? In other words, the management of change in the Indo-Pacific requires regional states to manage the security dilemma.
The dilemma is this: an increase in one state's power normally leads to increased insecurity in other states. Throughout history, nations ' especially the great powers ' have often failed to resolve the security dilemma. Marty's proposal should be a starting point for discussion on how an Indo-Pacific treaty of friendship and cooperation can address that problem.
The writer is executive director of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Jakarta.
