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 should be ‘more active’ in foreign policy, former ministers say
Indonesia needs to walk the talk in order to seize on the opportunities to direct geopolitical discourse and leverage its strategic value, previous foreign ministers and senior foreign policy experts have said, amid accusations of passivity in Indonesia's global ambitions.
Change Size
I
ndonesia’s “independent and active” foreign policy doctrine is apparently not active enough, according to past foreign ministers and senior international relations experts, as they caution against the pitfalls of diplomacy ahead of the nation’s Group of Twenty (G20) presidency and ASEAN chairmanship.
The government on Tuesday kicked off preparations for its G20 presidency beginning on Dec. 1 in a world of geopolitical and geoeconomic upheaval, punctuated by the existential crisis of ASEAN in Myanmar, the race to spur economic recovery from a deadly pandemic and the dilemma of facing a superpower rivalry in its own backyard.
As part of a series of dialogues commemorating its 50th anniversary, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) invited the country’s foreign policy dignitaries to comment on the state of the bebas-aktif (independent and active) doctrine and its future direction.
The consensus was clear: Indonesia needs to walk the talk in order to seize on the opportunities to direct geopolitical discourse and leverage its strategic value, amid accusations of passivity in its global ambitions.
Firm mandate
Since then-vice president Mohammad Hatta articulated the independent and active doctrine in 1948, Indonesian leaders have adopted distinct ideas for its expression.
The most common perception is that Indonesia would go about its international relations “independently” without pledging allegiance to any one party or side. It would also be “active” in maintaining world peace, whether in the global multilateral order or otherwise, as per constitutional mandate.
Over the seven years under President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, observers have noted a transformation from a foreign policy championing big ideas to that of a more practical, economic-minded mode that also eschews confrontation – outside a few diplomatic decisions that have ruffled neighbors’ feathers.
Foreign Minister Retno LP Marsudi, who has been leading the drive under Jokowi, insists that the bebas-aktif doctrine remains relevant, and that it is not a mere “manifestation of the [government’s] fear of taking firm positions.”
“This view is completely incorrect and does not reflect the actions of Indonesian diplomacy thus far,” Retno said in a prerecorded speech at the CSIS webinar.
“With an independent and active foreign policy, and as the one given the mandate and responsibility as foreign minister, I can actually say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in response to any issue or incident.”
International relations pundits have noted Retno’s focus on citizen protection, apparent in the string of kidnappings in the Philippines, as well as her emphasis on peace diplomacy and her mission to imbue Indonesian diplomacy with a gender perspective.
More recently, Indonesia has been actively involved in the Afghan peace process, and has even initiated contact with the Taliban after their takeover of Afghanistan last month.
Concrete solutions
Her predecessors, however, expressed concern that the national foreign policy could be more active in responding to the prevailing strategic and geopolitical challenges.
Marty Natalegawa suggested that independent and active politics should not be passive or merely state neutrality just so that Indonesia does not need to make a choice or maintain equidistance between conflicting parties.
Specifically in terms of geopolitical tensions between the United States and China, he said that policymakers should not just express hope and concerns, but also provide concrete and relevant responses to the situation.
“Sentiment is not policy and not for policymakers,” he said.
A similar diagnosis was offered by CSIS senior research fellow Rizal Sukma – the man behind Jokowi’s Global Maritime Fulcrum doctrine – who said that Indonesia should be actively creating conditions that can guarantee its strategic autonomy vis-a-vis the US and China, and even “create ballast” to prevent it from being drawn into the rivalry.
“We always say we are not interested in taking sides, hoping that there is no need to take sides. But those intentions and hopes are [neither] strategies nor policies. We see that many Foreign Ministry officials often use the words ‘I hope’ in their statements, but hope will not get you anywhere,” he said at Tuesday’s webinar.
In Southeast Asia, Indonesia is regarded in some sections as successful in keeping China at arms’ length. But unlike neighbors Singapore or Vietnam, Jakarta has had fewer similar successes in engaging with Washington, despite Indonesia being the seat of ASEAN and the Indo-Pacific.
Erosion of trust
Another former foreign minister, Hassan Wirajuda, said that if bebas-aktif was the spearhead of Indonesian foreign policy, then there was an effort to dull it, “which will not be beneficial when we are faced with incredible challenges”.
“In my opinion, we need to improve [the doctrine and make a] greater political commitment so that our foreign policy can be better implemented,” he said on Tuesday.
One way, he said, was to go beyond being independent and active in terms of processes and procedures and more actively contribute ideas or concepts important to international diplomacy.
Hassan, who was Indonesia’s lead architect for drafting the ASEAN Charter, took the regional bloc as an example, saying that it had reached “the lowest point in its history this year” following its failure to resolve the political and humanitarian crisis in Myanmar after the coup d’etat.
Retno said she was acutely aware of this challenge, noting that ASEAN’s failure to find an immediate solution to the conflict could lead to an eroding of trust in the association, one of the main cornerstones of Indonesia’s foreign policy.
“ASEAN must continue to be strengthened and Indonesia is highly committed to doing so,” she said.
Indonesia is set to become chairman of the group in 2023.
Transactional politics
One common critique of Indonesian foreign policy is the sense of regional entitlement that is frustrated by the gap between ideation and the capacity to realize goals, said Dewi Fortuna Anwar, another foreign policy scholar who attended the webinar.
As a result of this, she said, Indonesian foreign policy had become inconsistent. Before taking office, Jokowi criticized his predecessor Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono for being too focused on ideas and questioned the lack of real results.
“However, under the Jokowi administration, there is too much emphasis on economic challenges and a focus on economic diplomacy. Eventually, Jokowi’s foreign policy became transactional and questions were raised over its leadership,” Dewi said on Tuesday.
Experts say Jokowi’s foreign policy – or rather his lack of interest in it – belies the larger trend of developmental economics in his attempts to realize Indonesia’s potential. Some say his focus on deregulating for the benefit of businesses, building physical infrastructure and leveraging human capital had come at the expense of nurturing Indonesia’s global image and its potential geopolitical role.
“Economic diplomacy is not just about trade and investment, but also geoeconomics, like how to build economic architecture in our region,” said Marty.
“I believe our ambitions should be bigger than that; they should be able to change the [international] order and build influence far beyond our [G20] chairmanship year. Leadership and chairmanship are not the same things.” (tjs)
