Reashot Xigwin
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2012
- Messages
- 5,747
- Reaction score
- 0
By Giacomo Tognini & Abdul Khalik on 10:12 pm Jun 08, 2014
Indonesia has long placed the Association of Southeast Asian Nations at the center of its foreign policy, but both candidates running for president next month have vowed to pursue a more independent platform that would largely eschew the regional bloc. (EPA Photo/Lynn Bo Bo)esc
Jakarta. Two important dates that will have a major impact on Indonesia’s future are nearing. On July 9 this year, millions of Indonesians will cast their ballots for either Jakarta Governor Joko Widodo or former Lieutenant General Prabowo Subianto.
The second date, no less momentous, is the advent of the Asean Economic Community (AEC) at the end of 2015, establishing a single market across Southeast Asia.
Indonesia is the largest country in the 10-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and has often taken a leading role in resolving matters in the region, especially under the presidency of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and the foreign policy of the current foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, who have put a heavy emphasis on international activism and regional diplomacy. Both Marty and Yudhoyono have made Asean the cornerstone of the country’s foreign policy.
Speaking after a meeting between Yudhoyono and Singapore President Tony Tan Keng Yam, Marty emphasized the importance of Asean in helping resolve and prevent conflicts within the region, especially growing tensions in the South China Sea.
“Both leaders have agreed on the importance of Asean, and the grouping should show its initiative and leadership to prevent conflicts in the region,” Marty said.
He added that the Singaporean president had shown his deep appreciation for what Yudhoyono had achieved in the past 10 years.
The presidential campaign, however, has been marked by nationalistic statements on virtually all issues, including foreign affairs. Fears are even growing that Indonesia could become more isolationist after the election, choosing to pursue protectionist policies and limit diplomatic relations with countries in the region and global powers.
Many Indonesians, including prominent politicians, believe that Indonesia gives far more to Asean than it receives. The benefits of leading and being active in the organization are not always apparent, and the AEC’s arrival in 2015 will bring far more regional integration than currently exists, drawing fears from local businesspeople they will lose out to better-prepared peers in the region, says Aleksius Jemadu, dean of Pelita Harapan University’s School of Social and Political Sciences.
“Both camps seem to want to correct the current foreign policy’s heavy emphasis of Asean that has been pursued by Yudhoyono and Marty. Each presidential candidate seems to agree that what is good for Asean is not automatically good for Indonesia,” he says.
Aleksius says Prabowo and Joko want to stress that the Indonesian foreign policy’s constituents are the Indonesian people, not the Asean community.
“This whole time we’ve had a policy that we don’t know what benefits we get from pursuing it. It’s only for the sake of boosting our image among other Asean countries,” he says. “Now, both candidates will become much more critical of Asean, and take a pragmatic approach in calculating the costs and benefits in involvement in Asean. If they don’t see Indonesia getting concrete benefits, then there will be no involvement.”
Prabowo’s camp, Aleksius says, may probably put some distance between Jakarta and Asean. He argues that a critical view of Indonesia’s role in Asean is actually progress, given that not all engagements with the bloc benefit Indonesia.
As both camps are heavily focused on the economy, Aleksius says the upcoming AEC will also be scrutinized.
“There will be a significant change in priorities. Probably there will be no cancellation of Indonesia’s involvement in the AEC. But there will be a review,” he says.
Toothless organization?
The AEC, conceived in 2007, envisions a single market across Asean with the free flow of goods, services, investment and skilled labor. Its provisions include the removal of non-tariff barriers and the complete elimination of all tariffs and import duties, most of which had already been abolished with the Asean Free Trade Area (AFTA) in the 1990s.
Asean is often economically divided between the so-called “Asean 6,” the more developed nations comprising Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Brunei, Singapore and the Philippines, and “CLMV,” an initialism for Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam, who joined later and have less developed economies.
Between 2000 and 2010 this gap has decreased significantly. Gross domestic product per capita and intra-Asean trade and foreign direct investment have all increased dramatically over this period. While the average human development index has only marginally increased, poverty has been reduced by 17.5 percent across the region, with the Asean6-CLMV poverty rate gap narrowing to only 1.4 percent.
Surprisingly for a grouping that is often derided as toothless, the AEC is well on its way to implementation. All nations have adopted the Asean national single window (NSW), a facility that allows standardized information and documents such as customs declarations or import and export permits to be submitted once to a single location. Furthermore, government bond and stock markets across the region are converging as the 10 nations move toward becoming a single bloc.
This rapid process of economic integration begs the question of whether the new Indonesian president will continue to engage with Asean in the future or not.
Prabowo has presented a vision for a powerful Indonesian state that will seek to move past Asean, which he sees as belonging in the past, and take its rightful place as a rising global power and an Asian tiger in terms of economic achievement.
According to Prabowo’s campaign, the United States is no longer the world’s sole superpower. In his world view we now live in an era of multipolarity, where countries like China, Russia and Japan are challenging each other and the United States for primacy. Prabowo’s Indonesia would become a middle power on this international stage, collaborating with other nations to further its own goals.
Prabowo rejects Asean as a doomed venture that has failed to prevent conflict and has sapped too much of Indonesia’s resources while giving it very little in return. He has pledged to forgo regional interests to advance Indonesia’s position with other countries, for instance with like-minded socialist-leaning nations in Latin America.
Hatta Rajasa, Prabowo’s running mate, presents another obstacle to Asean economic integration. As coordinating economics minister, he became famous for his policies under the “Hattanomics” banner, a form of mild protectionism that deterred foreign investment and fought against free trade. His opposition to free trade agreements is in direct contrast to the AEC’s sweeping trade liberalization.
Hashim Djojohadikusumo, Prabowo’s brother and a member of his campaign team, has stated that “[Indonesia] will soon be in a position to project its power regionally and internationally.”
Looking past the AEC toward a greater role for his country, he adds that “Indonesia has even expressed [interest] in joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” a proposed free trade area between nations in the Asia-Pacific region including the United States, Canada, Japan and other Southeast Asian and Latin American countries.
Joko, Prabowo’s rival for the presidency, has taken a milder view of Asean’s benefits and disadvantages. His campaign team has stressed Indonesia’s identity as an “archipelagic state,” with a focus on maritime diplomacy.
A Joko administration would be reluctant to take the leadership mantle of Asean as Yudhoyono has, but would not dismiss it as a Prabowo one might. Joko’s advisers have said they would urge him to reassure Asean of its centrality to Indonesian foreign policy while pushing for greater democratization and giving more importance to Indonesian issues.
Indonesia has more than 5.9 million square kilometers of territorial waters, and Joko has pledged to defend the country’s vast exclusive economic zones (EEZs). China’s infamous “nine-dash line,” a tongue-shaped area stretching southward from Hainan, represents Beijing’s claims to the water and islands in the South China Sea. The line overlaps with a portion of Indonesia’s EEZ surrounding the Natuna Islands, which are situated between Borneo and peninsular Malaysia.
Indonesia has recently taken a neutral stance in the territorial rows between China and Asean members such as the Philippines and Vietnam. However, the commander-in-chief of the Indonesian Military (TNI), General Moeldoko, who is speculated to be close to Joko, has stated that the army needs to “carefully watch the South China Sea.”
The TNI has announced plans to upgrade Ranai Air Base in the Riau islands near Natuna and to eventually permanently station a squadron of fighter jets on the Natunas. As both candidates seek to demonstrate Indonesia’s strength, they could be drawn into a wider diplomatic conflict with China over Beijing’s inclusion of the Natuna EEZ in its territorial claims.
Pre-election hype
For all the talk of nationalism and abandoning Asean and the dangers that could bring, political analyst Awidya Santikajaya believes most of the rhetoric is just pre-election posturing. In a bid to win over voters, both candidates have drummed up nationalist sentiment by promising to project Indonesian power overseas.
“While the new president might be more nationalistic, he would be unlikely to [radically change] the country’s foreign policy direction,” Awidya outlines in an article on the matter.
Despite Prabowo and Joko’s claims to the contrary, Awidya states that “Indonesia’s foreign policy direction will likely follow current practices: using Asean as its foreign policy cornerstone, exploiting soft power advantages, and giving economic diplomacy a growing priority.”
Awidya also says that “the next leader will still emphasize the need for Asean cohesiveness.” This would imply a continuation of the policies that have been pursued by Marty.
It is very possible that the current foreign minister could be kept in his post by whoever wins the presidency, as both candidates want to focus on domestic issues and economic reform.
Marty, who has drawn much international praise for boosting Indonesia’s international clout in the last several years, is still seen by many as the safest bet for foreign minister, whoever wins the election, as he can maintain Indonesia’s foreign policy stability while the president concentrates on domestic economic issues.
Several able diplomats from inside the Foreign Ministry, such as Dian Triansyah Djani, current director general of American and European affairs; Retno L.P. Marsudi, the Indonesian ambassador to the Netherlands; and Indonesian Ambassador to Belgium and the European Union Arif Havas Oegroseno could also be picked to provide stability.
From outside the ministry, candidates for the position that have been touted in the media if Joko were to win are Andi Widjajanto, a lecturer of international relations at the University of Indonesia, and Rizal Sukma, who is the executive director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.
Both Rizal and Andi, who are members of Joko’s campaign team are renowned as experts in strategic and international issues.
As for Prabowo, a possible foreign minister could be Bara Hasibuan, who is a spokesman for his campaign and head of foreign relations for the National Mandate Party, or PAN, which forms part of Prabowo’s coalition.
Beside his expertise in international affairs, Bara, a Harvard University graduate, is an experienced politician as he was instrumental in the founding of the PAN after the fall of the strongman Suharto.
But whether the two candidates like it or not, the implementation of the AEC in 2015 will be an important matter that the future administration will have to face, Aleksius says.
An organization that is routinely dismissed will morph into a single market that will change the daily lives of Southeast Asian citizens like Asean never has before, with Indonesians who until now know very little about Asean will find their lives affected by imported goods and services from other countries, the arrival of foreign workers, and more opportunities than ever to find jobs abroad in countries like Singapore, Malaysia or Thailand.
Prabowo and Joko seem to dislike the idea of further integration, preferring to take Indonesia on its own independent road to greatness. Time will tell whether this is simply an election promise or if it will become reality.
Meanwhile, the rest of Southeast Asia is anxiously waiting.
In Indonesian Election, the Future of Asean at Stake - The Jakarta Globe
Should ASEAN be disbanded?
Indonesia has long placed the Association of Southeast Asian Nations at the center of its foreign policy, but both candidates running for president next month have vowed to pursue a more independent platform that would largely eschew the regional bloc. (EPA Photo/Lynn Bo Bo)esc
Jakarta. Two important dates that will have a major impact on Indonesia’s future are nearing. On July 9 this year, millions of Indonesians will cast their ballots for either Jakarta Governor Joko Widodo or former Lieutenant General Prabowo Subianto.
The second date, no less momentous, is the advent of the Asean Economic Community (AEC) at the end of 2015, establishing a single market across Southeast Asia.
Indonesia is the largest country in the 10-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and has often taken a leading role in resolving matters in the region, especially under the presidency of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and the foreign policy of the current foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, who have put a heavy emphasis on international activism and regional diplomacy. Both Marty and Yudhoyono have made Asean the cornerstone of the country’s foreign policy.
Speaking after a meeting between Yudhoyono and Singapore President Tony Tan Keng Yam, Marty emphasized the importance of Asean in helping resolve and prevent conflicts within the region, especially growing tensions in the South China Sea.
“Both leaders have agreed on the importance of Asean, and the grouping should show its initiative and leadership to prevent conflicts in the region,” Marty said.
He added that the Singaporean president had shown his deep appreciation for what Yudhoyono had achieved in the past 10 years.
The presidential campaign, however, has been marked by nationalistic statements on virtually all issues, including foreign affairs. Fears are even growing that Indonesia could become more isolationist after the election, choosing to pursue protectionist policies and limit diplomatic relations with countries in the region and global powers.
Many Indonesians, including prominent politicians, believe that Indonesia gives far more to Asean than it receives. The benefits of leading and being active in the organization are not always apparent, and the AEC’s arrival in 2015 will bring far more regional integration than currently exists, drawing fears from local businesspeople they will lose out to better-prepared peers in the region, says Aleksius Jemadu, dean of Pelita Harapan University’s School of Social and Political Sciences.
“Both camps seem to want to correct the current foreign policy’s heavy emphasis of Asean that has been pursued by Yudhoyono and Marty. Each presidential candidate seems to agree that what is good for Asean is not automatically good for Indonesia,” he says.
Aleksius says Prabowo and Joko want to stress that the Indonesian foreign policy’s constituents are the Indonesian people, not the Asean community.
“This whole time we’ve had a policy that we don’t know what benefits we get from pursuing it. It’s only for the sake of boosting our image among other Asean countries,” he says. “Now, both candidates will become much more critical of Asean, and take a pragmatic approach in calculating the costs and benefits in involvement in Asean. If they don’t see Indonesia getting concrete benefits, then there will be no involvement.”
Prabowo’s camp, Aleksius says, may probably put some distance between Jakarta and Asean. He argues that a critical view of Indonesia’s role in Asean is actually progress, given that not all engagements with the bloc benefit Indonesia.
As both camps are heavily focused on the economy, Aleksius says the upcoming AEC will also be scrutinized.
“There will be a significant change in priorities. Probably there will be no cancellation of Indonesia’s involvement in the AEC. But there will be a review,” he says.
Toothless organization?
The AEC, conceived in 2007, envisions a single market across Asean with the free flow of goods, services, investment and skilled labor. Its provisions include the removal of non-tariff barriers and the complete elimination of all tariffs and import duties, most of which had already been abolished with the Asean Free Trade Area (AFTA) in the 1990s.
Asean is often economically divided between the so-called “Asean 6,” the more developed nations comprising Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Brunei, Singapore and the Philippines, and “CLMV,” an initialism for Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam, who joined later and have less developed economies.
Between 2000 and 2010 this gap has decreased significantly. Gross domestic product per capita and intra-Asean trade and foreign direct investment have all increased dramatically over this period. While the average human development index has only marginally increased, poverty has been reduced by 17.5 percent across the region, with the Asean6-CLMV poverty rate gap narrowing to only 1.4 percent.
Surprisingly for a grouping that is often derided as toothless, the AEC is well on its way to implementation. All nations have adopted the Asean national single window (NSW), a facility that allows standardized information and documents such as customs declarations or import and export permits to be submitted once to a single location. Furthermore, government bond and stock markets across the region are converging as the 10 nations move toward becoming a single bloc.
This rapid process of economic integration begs the question of whether the new Indonesian president will continue to engage with Asean in the future or not.
Prabowo has presented a vision for a powerful Indonesian state that will seek to move past Asean, which he sees as belonging in the past, and take its rightful place as a rising global power and an Asian tiger in terms of economic achievement.
According to Prabowo’s campaign, the United States is no longer the world’s sole superpower. In his world view we now live in an era of multipolarity, where countries like China, Russia and Japan are challenging each other and the United States for primacy. Prabowo’s Indonesia would become a middle power on this international stage, collaborating with other nations to further its own goals.
Prabowo rejects Asean as a doomed venture that has failed to prevent conflict and has sapped too much of Indonesia’s resources while giving it very little in return. He has pledged to forgo regional interests to advance Indonesia’s position with other countries, for instance with like-minded socialist-leaning nations in Latin America.
Hatta Rajasa, Prabowo’s running mate, presents another obstacle to Asean economic integration. As coordinating economics minister, he became famous for his policies under the “Hattanomics” banner, a form of mild protectionism that deterred foreign investment and fought against free trade. His opposition to free trade agreements is in direct contrast to the AEC’s sweeping trade liberalization.
Hashim Djojohadikusumo, Prabowo’s brother and a member of his campaign team, has stated that “[Indonesia] will soon be in a position to project its power regionally and internationally.”
Looking past the AEC toward a greater role for his country, he adds that “Indonesia has even expressed [interest] in joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” a proposed free trade area between nations in the Asia-Pacific region including the United States, Canada, Japan and other Southeast Asian and Latin American countries.
Joko, Prabowo’s rival for the presidency, has taken a milder view of Asean’s benefits and disadvantages. His campaign team has stressed Indonesia’s identity as an “archipelagic state,” with a focus on maritime diplomacy.
A Joko administration would be reluctant to take the leadership mantle of Asean as Yudhoyono has, but would not dismiss it as a Prabowo one might. Joko’s advisers have said they would urge him to reassure Asean of its centrality to Indonesian foreign policy while pushing for greater democratization and giving more importance to Indonesian issues.
Indonesia has more than 5.9 million square kilometers of territorial waters, and Joko has pledged to defend the country’s vast exclusive economic zones (EEZs). China’s infamous “nine-dash line,” a tongue-shaped area stretching southward from Hainan, represents Beijing’s claims to the water and islands in the South China Sea. The line overlaps with a portion of Indonesia’s EEZ surrounding the Natuna Islands, which are situated between Borneo and peninsular Malaysia.
Indonesia has recently taken a neutral stance in the territorial rows between China and Asean members such as the Philippines and Vietnam. However, the commander-in-chief of the Indonesian Military (TNI), General Moeldoko, who is speculated to be close to Joko, has stated that the army needs to “carefully watch the South China Sea.”
The TNI has announced plans to upgrade Ranai Air Base in the Riau islands near Natuna and to eventually permanently station a squadron of fighter jets on the Natunas. As both candidates seek to demonstrate Indonesia’s strength, they could be drawn into a wider diplomatic conflict with China over Beijing’s inclusion of the Natuna EEZ in its territorial claims.
Pre-election hype
For all the talk of nationalism and abandoning Asean and the dangers that could bring, political analyst Awidya Santikajaya believes most of the rhetoric is just pre-election posturing. In a bid to win over voters, both candidates have drummed up nationalist sentiment by promising to project Indonesian power overseas.
“While the new president might be more nationalistic, he would be unlikely to [radically change] the country’s foreign policy direction,” Awidya outlines in an article on the matter.
Despite Prabowo and Joko’s claims to the contrary, Awidya states that “Indonesia’s foreign policy direction will likely follow current practices: using Asean as its foreign policy cornerstone, exploiting soft power advantages, and giving economic diplomacy a growing priority.”
Awidya also says that “the next leader will still emphasize the need for Asean cohesiveness.” This would imply a continuation of the policies that have been pursued by Marty.
It is very possible that the current foreign minister could be kept in his post by whoever wins the presidency, as both candidates want to focus on domestic issues and economic reform.
Marty, who has drawn much international praise for boosting Indonesia’s international clout in the last several years, is still seen by many as the safest bet for foreign minister, whoever wins the election, as he can maintain Indonesia’s foreign policy stability while the president concentrates on domestic economic issues.
Several able diplomats from inside the Foreign Ministry, such as Dian Triansyah Djani, current director general of American and European affairs; Retno L.P. Marsudi, the Indonesian ambassador to the Netherlands; and Indonesian Ambassador to Belgium and the European Union Arif Havas Oegroseno could also be picked to provide stability.
From outside the ministry, candidates for the position that have been touted in the media if Joko were to win are Andi Widjajanto, a lecturer of international relations at the University of Indonesia, and Rizal Sukma, who is the executive director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.
Both Rizal and Andi, who are members of Joko’s campaign team are renowned as experts in strategic and international issues.
As for Prabowo, a possible foreign minister could be Bara Hasibuan, who is a spokesman for his campaign and head of foreign relations for the National Mandate Party, or PAN, which forms part of Prabowo’s coalition.
Beside his expertise in international affairs, Bara, a Harvard University graduate, is an experienced politician as he was instrumental in the founding of the PAN after the fall of the strongman Suharto.
But whether the two candidates like it or not, the implementation of the AEC in 2015 will be an important matter that the future administration will have to face, Aleksius says.
An organization that is routinely dismissed will morph into a single market that will change the daily lives of Southeast Asian citizens like Asean never has before, with Indonesians who until now know very little about Asean will find their lives affected by imported goods and services from other countries, the arrival of foreign workers, and more opportunities than ever to find jobs abroad in countries like Singapore, Malaysia or Thailand.
Prabowo and Joko seem to dislike the idea of further integration, preferring to take Indonesia on its own independent road to greatness. Time will tell whether this is simply an election promise or if it will become reality.
Meanwhile, the rest of Southeast Asia is anxiously waiting.
In Indonesian Election, the Future of Asean at Stake - The Jakarta Globe
Should ASEAN be disbanded?
