Postscript Nov-Dec 2011

8/3/2019 Postscript Nov-Dec 2011

1/63

ostscri t Vol VIII, No.6, November-December 2011

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

IN POST CONFLICT REGIONS:

A REVIEW

3 Editors Note: A New Hope?

Hopefully.

7 Sustainable Development in PostConflict Regions: a Review

14 Indonesian Chairmanship ofASEAN and the Bali Concord III

29 Security Dilemma in South EastAsia: Between the Two Major

Powers

40 Workshop Peace Education:Breaking the Stereotypes, Buildin

Trust in Jakarta and Jayapura

46 The Existance of TraditionalMarket in Indonesia: a Reflection

of Capitalistc Bureaucracy in the

New Order Era


2/63


3/63

Editors Note

3

A New Hope?

Hopefully.

It is still a question mark. In any way, people are still in doubt about the

expected possible performance of the new team of the KPK (Corruption

Eradication Commission). The surprised choice of Dr. Abraham Samad

(people expected earlier that BambangWijayanto will be selected as the

KPK new leader at the voting) had let people down. A question is

inevitably raised: behind the noisy voices of the Commission III members

of the House of Representatives, are they seriously endeavoring the

eradication of corruption? People are doubtful. And, who was behind the

rapid surge of the vote for Abraham Samad. Some people were frightenedby the possible victory of BambangWijoyanto since he is well known for

his determination, especially those who are possibly entangled in the act of

corruption.

But at last Abraham Samad with BusyroMuqoddas (the former KPK

chairman), BambangWijoyanto and others as deputies, were installed by

President SusiloBambangYudhoyono, with immediate home works,

among others, the Century Bank and the Travelers Check cases. Thesociety as a whole is in a new hope: corruption will be eradicated, at least


4/63

Editors Note

4

part of it, bit by bit. People are actually realistic, that corruption could not

be erased in a short time, especially when such a practice has been

undergoing for decades, even centuries perhaps (considering the habit of

tributes and bribes which have been going on since the time of kingdoms

in Indonesia), while the common people are submissive. Only lately, after

the fall of the New Order, that people have the courage to launch

demonstration from peaceful to wild and even violent protests, taking lives

on them and the officers.

And, corruption has also been practiced from the top level of governance,

down to the villages. Anybody who is going to make an ID card (KTP)

usually give a small denomination of rupiah (Rp5,000 or Rp10,000)

although the law says that making an ID is free of charge. Rp5,000 is

nothing for a man like GayusTambunan, the medium level official of the

Directorate of Taxation who is now still in the process of trial for his tens

of billion corruption charge. On the other hand, for the village head who

receives the donation, given voluntarily by ID seekers, small change

cash money of Rp5,000 or Rp10,000 means a lot. In a day the village head

may receive more then one person. For this, the head must share the

money with his subordinates in the village office, or else he would be

charged of corruption too. This is the picture of poverty that strangles tens

of millions of Indonesian citizens.

People will be contend enough if the KPK truly operates, capturing

corruptors and put them to trial. But the stake is high for the KPK

officials, since 237 million people of Indonesia expect them to put to jail

not just corruptors of small change cash money but the big and very big

fish (indeed the Century Bank case involves Rp6.7 trillion of the

governments bailout, a sum of taxpayers money, that raises big question

marks: what is going on actually up there? Where has the money gone?)


5/63

Editors Note

5

The forensic audit done by the BPK (the governments financial audit

body) has failed to find out who the people involved are, even the head of

BPK has frankly said that it did not succeed in revealing any clue of the

possible corruption in the Century case. If it is so, what the KPK can do to

break the case and put the culpritswho are they?to trial?

***

National elections will be held in 2014, but the political situation has

started to be smoldering. Political parties have started to be prepared, there

has been dispute over the Parliamentary Threshold (5, 4 or 3 percent). Butthe law on the election has not been ready yet and this has threatened to

make a delay on the deliberation on the process establishment of the

Election Commission, with further implication on the election in regions.

One or two brave men from small partieshave declared their

readiness to field themselves as presidential candidates. The big parties,

however, still restrain themselves from mentioning any candidates for the

next president. President Yudhoyono has been in office for two terms and

is forbidden to run for the third, so that other candidatespeople expect

young candidates will run for the next presidential elections. But nobody

has yet appeared, people are expecting, some have even alleged that the

days of old people have gone away.

The tasks of the government, meanwhile, are not less lighter. Natural

disasters as well as man made ones have escalated into much higher

frequencies. The global warming has started to take its toll. Se the rob,

the flood that comes from the sea has overflowed the northern Jakarta (in

Semarang such a flood has been inundating the northern part of the city

for decades). The threat from the climate change has more and more

apparent: from the last two years the dry season has lasted very short (less


6/63

Editors Note

6

than the normal season) followed by the come back of the wet season,

with high frequencies of downpours completed with wind nearly the level

of typhoon. Even Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam has again been hit by an

earthquake of 7.6 of the Richter Scale. The [prolonged wet season has an

impact in the form of the slowing down of daily need transportation that

makes prices soar. Indonesia has a good enough economic development,

yet there is an apprehension that the financial crisis in Europe and the

United States will come and give its impact.

So, there are all kinds of problems that have ambushed Indonesia. The

government is expected after the last reshuffleto be more serious in

dealing with the ambush. People in general hope that with the two years of

time that President SBY still has, and his new team will show its wisdom

and adroitness in proofing promises to decrease the poverty level. The

situation now is improving, seen by the increasing percentage of middle

class people. It should be followed by the decrease of the number of poor

people. For this people are waiting the fact. ***


7/63

Politics and Human Rights

7

Sustainable Development

In Post Conflict Regions: A

Review

Inggrid Galuh Mustikawati, Researcher, The Habibie Center

The process of democratization has enlightened the aspect of pluralism in

Indonesia. The variety of ethnic groups, cultures, religions and societies

perceptions can contribute positively to the development of democracy.

Yet, on the other hand, this differentiation can create conflict that may

quickly escalate into violent conflict of the type that has occurred from

time to time in Indonesia.

According to its type, conflicts can be classified into two types, horizontal

and vertical. Horizontal conflicts concern inter-communal grievance

within a society that are driven by such things as ethnicity, race and

problems in religions. Two prime examples in the past were the ethnic

conflicts in Kalimantan between the indigenous Dayaks and the settlers

from the island of Madura and the inter-religious conflict in the Maluku

region. Horizontal conflicts can easily arise in segregated communities

based on religions and ethnic groups. In Maluku for example, residences

are segregated based on religion. In Kalimantan, most residences are

segregated based on ethnicity and so too are the jobs that are

alsosegregated based on ethnicity. These kinds of segregation tend to

strengthen the sentiment of primordialism that can create friction within

society.


8/63


8

On the other hand, vertical conflict is a conflict that refers to political

aspirations, where the dominant source of conflict is ideology or

separatism. Vertical conflict deals with the friction between religious or

political groups and the central government (that is, between the center

and the periphery) as happened in the past in Aceh such as with the Darul

Islammovement/Indonesian Islamic Army (Tentara Islam Indonesia),

recognized as the DI/TII rebellion, and by its successor, the Free Aceh

Movement/GAM. To their credit, a peace deal and an end to the

insurgencies was finally struck in 2004 in the aftermath of the Indian

Ocean earthquake and tsunami. However, the atmosphere of rebellion stilloccurs in two most easterly Indonesian provinces of Papua and West

Papua organized by OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka/Free Papua

Movement). Vertical conflict also exists in Maluku done by supporters of

the so-called Republic of South Maluku (Republik Maluku Selatan), a

Dutch colonial creation, which until now has relatively small number of

active members in exile n the Netherlands.

In the view of some scholars, conflict in Indonesia can not be separatedfrom demographic matters. As the comparison, in one million of

population, there are 15 major ethnic groups that regularly migrate from

their place to others and build their own community in their new region

(LIPI, 2011). Internal migration of this type is not only a matter of

physical movement but also of bringing their cultural values to the new

region, which will have consequences in the political and economic

aspects. This variability of thedemographic population, which is

interrelated with primordial identity, has created a potential for conflict

that makes violent conflict in some regions a considered possibility.

By referring to the nature of conflict in Indonesia, there are several

underlying backgrounds to conflict in this country, namely injustice,


9/63


9

inequality due to imbalance in the distribution of development and

anextreme socio-economic gap (marginalization) between the haves and

the have-nots. Therefore, awelfare approach is the appropriate measure to

overcome the conflict rather than the security-focused approach alone

although in certain situation a conservative security approach is still

needed. Yet, the issue ofcoordination between institutions always comes

to the fore because conflicts can not be resolved regionally. It needs the

involvement of all parties and all related ministries, such as the Ministry

of Social Affairs, Ministry of Home Affairs, etc. In fact, different

ministries have different projects that will be carried out in the regions ofthe vulnerable people, although not surprisinglythe researchers found

some overlapping of projects managed by these different ministries. Of

course these overlapping projects will only waste scarce funds and limit

the overall effectiveness of government efforts.

The several inter-communal conflicts and internal threats to security that

have occurred in Indonesia, have contributed to the emergence of

Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) which lately are recognized as the New People. Central Sulawesi, East Nusa Tenggara (NTT) and Maluku

are conflict prone areas and therefore create a momentum for the existence

of the New People. To be more specific, from 183 districts in several areas

that potential to conflict, 143 of them are conflict prone areas. There are

also a large number of people,possibly a few hundred thousand that

remain displaced as a result of former separatist conflicts across Indonesia,

including East Timorese who reside in East Nusa Tenggara after their

homeland was let go by Indonesia at the pressure of the United Nations

to become Timor Lesteat the end of the Cold War and the change of the

global political constellation. The presence of the East Timorese in the

NTT region has complicated matters, politically, socially and


10/63


10

economically. Who, for example, has the responsibility to take care of

themthe local government, the provincial government or the central

government? The victims of conflicts generally belong to some of the

most vulnerable groups in the country. The problems they face are often

linked to a lack of basic resources such as land, housing, water, sanitation,

infrastructure, education, health facilities and opportunities for economic

development.

In reality, these New People live in shelters for years and receive little or

attention from related governments. If no facilities are provided for them,

how can they survive? Therefore, sustainable development to empower

these New People is needed. For years, the government has tried to shift

the paradigm of dealing with the New People. At the beginning of the

conflict, giving social assistance directly was a common response to help

them. Yet, that kind of paradigm needs to be reviewed by proposing the

idea of sustainable development, making them independent economically.

In addition, sustainable development is a long term issue and can only be

achieved with the involvement andcooperation of local, provincial andnational authorities. As mentioned above, the problem that many of these

institutions face is the matter of coordination, where different institutions

perform different projects to the same vulnerable people. The situation has

to be fixed because to maximize the benefit of the projects, policy makers

need to establish a time frame for the projects so that their actions can be

measured against the identified needs and the goals that they want to

achieve. Of course, the legal and regulatory framework to support these

policies needs also to be carefully considered. Therefore, integration and

coordination is the key for these different institutions so that what they

have already planned can be achieved comprehensively.


11/63


11

In fact, the settlement of the relocation issue of the New People is not

often run comprehensively. Basically, the New People should not be

forced into staying in shelters for many more than three years because

their mental condition will break down and they will tend to come to rely

on assistance and become dependent. In the case of the New People in

East Nusa Tenggara, the relocation has actually already been done by

providing new residences for them. However, due to a lack of substantial

access such as to water, schools and markets, these New People have

returned to their former shelters near the Regional Planning Agency

(Bapeda)s office which provides reasonable access to such facilities.Therefore, the government needs a grand strategy to handle residential

problems that provide not only for the New People but also locals in East

Nusa Tenggara. The government needs to consider the locals because East

Nusa Tenggara is one of the most underdeveloped provinces in the

archipelago. As we know, following the separation of East Timor from

Indonesia, a number of New People decided to live in Indonesias

territory. Unfortunately, the standard of living in most population areas in

East Nusa Tenggara is at the very lowest level, therefore the settlement of

New People has also to include those locals who live in low-income

communities.

To overcome the problems faced by the New People, the local

governments will have to contend with and arrive at solution to several

obstacles, which consist of (1) the matter of adatabase of the New People

where there are no reliable estimates of the number of people because they

are so widely spread over many regions, (2) the matter of bad basic

facilities for water, sanitation, health and education, (3) the matter of

gender inequality, (4) the matter of weak socio-economic conditions, (5)

the matter of overlapping projects proposed by different ministries, and (6)


12/63


12

the matter of the bureaucracy which deals with the allocation of all

financial flows for solving community problems.

In the future, the people who handle the database in the local institutions

need to increase their skills to update the existing database to make sure

that the all New People are detected and therefore, they will get their basic

rights. With the involvement of local and international donors, it is

important to build the network between local government and the people

(including the New people), especially when they face common problems,

for example, the availability of clean water in East Nusa Tenggara.

Furthermore, it is important that related institutions of the government

make sure that budgeting in the project planning process is based equally

on the needs of the people without any unnecessary excision.

Lastly, the sustainable development model that is proposed here for the

government cannot just stand alone with a welfare approach it needs tom

be complemented by a moderate security approach as necessary, and

having regard to the existing situation and conditions. Furthermore,

improving the capacity of the local government is very important when

considering sustainable development for the New People. The most

important aspect that has to be dealt with by the decision makers is to get

involved in conflict assessment forums so that they get the real data and

information from the field. In this way, there will be no misunderstandings

or gaps in the policy that they make. ***

References:

Paper in Workshop on Institutional Mechanism of Conflict Prevention in

Indonesia, LIPI, 2011.


13/63


13

Papers in Seminar Sustainable Development in Conflict Prone Areas,

Organized by The Ministry for the Development of Disadvantaged

Regions Republic of Indonesia, and the European Union, Jakarta, 26

October 2011.


14/63


14

Indonesian Chairmanship of

ASEAN

And the Bali Concord III

Ibrahim Almuttaqi, AsiaEurope Institute, University of

Malaya

1. Introduction

When Indonesia assumed the rotating chair of ASEAN for 2011, a great

deal of hope and expectation could be found amongst commentators over

the direction and fate the regional organisation would take.1

Their

optimism, it could be argued, was not misplaced as it was fuelled by two

key factors. Firstly they were encouraged by Indonesia's growing

international stature. Over the past few years Indonesia has developed into

a peaceful and stable democracy matched by an economy boasting strong

sustained growth.23 So much so, the country, now regarded as a rising

power, is seen as both influential and increasingly able to make her weight

felt abroad.45

Such credentials boded well for ASEAN. Secondly, they

1 Kompas (2011, January 7). Indonesia Ketua ASEAN 2011. Retrieved from

http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/01/07/04253734/indonesia.ketua.asean.20112 Barton, G. (2008). Indonesia's Year of Living Normally Taking the Long View on

Indonesia's Progress. Southeast Asian Affairs, Vol. 2008.3 Ramage, D.E. (2007). Indonesia Democracy First, Good Governance Later.

Southeast Asian Affairs, Vol. 2007.4 Pringle, R. (2011). Indonesia's Moment. Wilson Quarterly, Winter 2011, Vol. 35,

Issue 1.5 Aguswandi (2010). An Indonesian Future Overcoming the Challenges of an

Islamic Democracy.Harvard International Review.


15/63


15

were encouraged by past history. On each occasion that Indonesia held the

ASEAN Chair in 1976 and 2003, their turn at ASEAN's helm had

produced two landmark documents in the form of the Bali Concord I and

Bali Concord II. The former laid out ASEAN's fundamental principles,

established the ASEAN Secretariat and dictated how member-states

should engaged with each other.67 In particular, the Bali Concord I

emphasized the non-use of violence in settling disputes between member-

states. The latter constituted the goal of an ASEAN Community to be

achieved by 2020 (later speeded up to 2015) along the lines of three

pillars. They were the Political-Security Community, the EconomicCommunity and the Socio-Cultural Community.

8

As Indonesia's third turn at the helm of ASEAN comes to an end, it has

generally been agreed that those early hopes and expectations have been

successfully lived up to. With two ASEAN Summits (hosted in Jakarta

and Bali) completed, the Thai-Cambodian border conflict calmed, and

Myanmar's 2014 chairmanship issue resolved, Singapore's Foreign

Minister, K Shanmugam, believes that ASEAN has progressed wellunder the strong and able leadership of current Chair, Indonesia.

9Jusuf

Wanandi of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies added by

praising the country for injecting new thinking, new ideas and new

6 Xinhua (2011, November 17). ASEAN to Act in Unison in Global Matters:

IndonesianFM. Retrieved from http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-

11/17/c_131253581.htm7 ASEAN Declaration of ASEAN Concord, 1976. Retrieved from

http://www.asean.org/5049.htm8 Tempo (2011, November 17). SBY Berharap Kerja Sama ASEAN Kian Kokoh.

Retrieved from http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2011/11/17/118366995/SBY-

Berharap--Kerja-Sama-ASEAN-Kian-Kokoh9 Channel News Asia (2011, November 13). ASEAN has progressed well under

Indonesia chairmanship: Shanmugam. Retrieved from

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1165154/1/.html


16/63


16

programs into the region.10 This was best evidenced by the adoption of

Indonesia's Bali Declaration on ASEAN Community in a Global

Community of Nations otherwise known as the Bali Concord III. In order

to analyse Indonesia's Chairmanship of ASEAN and the Bali Concord III,

this article will first examine Indonesia's role in calming the Thai-

Cambodian border conflict and in resolving Myanmar's 2014

chairmanship issue before moving onto a critical examination of the Bali

Concord III. The article will then conclude by summarising the major

findings highlighted by the article. Let us now turn to address each step in

turn.

2. Indonesia's role in the Cambodian-Thai Border Conflict

On the 4th February 2011, a border conflict between two ASEAN member-

states, Cambodia and Thailand broke out and for over three months

claimed the lives of seventeen soldiers from both sides and one Thai

civilian as well as causing the displacement of tens of thousands of

villagers.11

During the 18th

ASEAN Summit held in Jakarta in May 2011

and with the conflict still fresh in the memory of its belligerents, the event

was overshadowed by a bitter exchange of barbs as both Cambodian

Prime Minister Hun Sen and then-Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Veijajiva

traded insults during their opening remarks at the plenary session.12

The

10 Jakarta Post (2011, December 8). Insight: The 2011 ASEAN Summit and its

Significance. Retrieved from

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/11/17/insight-the-2011-asean-summit-and-

its-significance.html11 BBC (2011, May 4). Thailand-Cambodia Border Crossing Reopens. Retrieved from

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-1327922812 Bangkok Post (2011, November 18). All Smiles as Yingluck makes her Debut.

Retrieved from http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/266766/all-smiles-as-

yingluck-makes-her-debut


17/63


17

evident hostility between the leaders of Thailand and Cambodia made a

mockery of the ASEAN Vision 2020 of:

a concert of Southeast Asian nations, outward looking, living in

peace, stability and prosperity, bonded together in partnership in

dynamic development and in a community of caring

societies.

To Indonesia's credit and to use its Foreign Minister, Marty Natalegawa's

terminology, the ASEAN Chair made extensive efforts at waging

peace.

13

On the sidelines of the 18

th

ASEAN Summit, IndonesianPresident, Susilio Bambang Yudhoyono, chaired talks between the two

warring parties whilst Foreign Minister Natalegawa embarked on an

exhaustive shuttle diplomacy mission that involved travelling to Bangkok,

Phnom Penh and even as far as New York in front of the United Nations

Security Council. Such efforts should not be easily dismissed given the

resistance and obstacles Indonesia faced from both sides. Cambodia made

it clear it felt no qualms at bypassing bilateral and (Indonesian-led)

regional peace talks by pleading directly to the UN Security Council and

the International Court of Justice for help, arguing 'only the clarification of

the ICJ's verdict can solve this issue, while ASEAN...can not.'14 This was

despite Article 17 of the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation which

states:

[P]arties to a dispute should be encouraged to take initiatives to

solve it by friendly negotiations before resorting to the other

13 Statement by H.E. Dr. R.M. Marty M. Natalegawa Minister for Foreign Affairs

Republic of Indonesia at the General Debate of the 66th Session of the United Nations

General Assembly, New York, 26 September 2011. Retrieved from

http://gadebate.un.org/sites/default/files/gastatements/66/ID_en.pdf14 Agence Kampuchea Presse (2011, February 23). Cambodia Sends Documents to the

ICJ. Retrieved from http://www.akp.gov.kh/?p=2767


18/63


18

procedures provided for in the Charter of the United

Nations.15

Thailand insisted peace talks should be strictly bilateral and opposed

Indonesia's efforts.16

This was made clear when Thailand did not attend

the General Border Committee meeting to be held in Bogor, Indonesia

and when its delegation at the Join Commission on Demarcation of Land

Boundary was led by only an ambassador as opposed to Cambodia's

Senior Minister-led delegation.1718 Considering the abovementioned cases

of resistance and obstacles, it is no mean achievement that during the 19th

ASEAN Summit held in Bali, Indonesia, there was no mention of the

Cambodian-Thai border conflict and the summit was characterised by

smiles all around.19

Moreover, Indonesia's leadership in resolving the

issue was supported and praised by the United Nations Security Council,

the United States, France and China among others.20212223

For example

15 ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, 1976. Retrieved from

http://www.asean.org/1217.htm

16 Agence Kampuchea Presse (2011, February 17). Thailand Should not Fear or AvoidMulti-lateral Mediation to Resolve Preah Vihear Conflict. Retrieved from

http://www.akp.gov.kh/?p=250717 Agence Kampuchea Presse (2011, April 11). Indonesia Urges Thailand to Consider

Soon the Sending of Indonesian Observers. Retrieved

fromhttp://www.akp.gov.kh/?p=484318 Thailand's Government Public Relations Department (2011, April 11). Thai-

Cambodian JBC Meeting Ends Satisfactorily. Retrieved from

http://thailand.prd.go.th/view_inside.php?id=561519 Bangkok Post (2011, November 18). All Smiles as Yingluck makes her Debut.

Retrieved from http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/266766/all-smiles-as-

yingluck-makes-her-debut20 Agence Kampuchea Presse (2011, May 4). France Supports Indonesia's Role in

Cambodia-Thailand Border Dispute. Retrieved from

http://www.akp.gov.kh/?p=583921 ABC News (2011, April 26). US Backs Effort to Resolve Thai-Cambodian

Violence. Retrieved from

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13454629#.TuO6AmNkb8022 Reuters (2011, February 15). UN Council leaves Thai-Cambodian conflict to


19/63


19

China's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Ma Zhaoxu, stated, China

appreciates and supports Indonesia's active mediation efforts to tackle the

Cambodian-Thailand border conflict under the ASEAN framework.24

3. Indonesia's role in the Myanmar Issue

The announcement by Myanmar's nominally civilian President, Thein

Sein, that his country was seeking to assume the ASEAN Chair in 2014

had placed ASEAN and the wider world in a delicate conundrum. The

conundrum is best represented by the dividing views of Tan See Seng

from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore andEva Sundari Kusuma from the ASEAN Inter-parliamentary Burma

Caucus. On the one hand, Tan See Seng argued that giving Burma the

chair would be a way of patting them on the back and encouraging them to

continue what they have been recently doing domestically.25 On the other

hand, Eva Sundari Kusuma argued that Our call is very clear. Let us

postpone...This is to ensure that Burma will not just fool Asean into

getting the chairmanship, and that they will continue with the democratic

process."26

Thus ASEAN under Indonesia was faced with a dual problem. Firstly,

given Myanmar's poor democratic and human rights records, approving

Myanmar's chairmanship desire without ensuring the country's genuine

ASEAN. Retrieved from http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/idINIndia-

5489442011021423 Xinhua (2011, February 23). China Backs Indonesia's Efforts to Tackle Cambodia-

Thailand Conflict. Retrieved from

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-02/22/c_13744168.htm24 Ibid.25 Bangkok Post (2011, November 16). ASEAN Ministers 'to approve' Burma as 2014

Chair. Retrieved from http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/266498/asean-

ministers-to-approve-burma-as-2014-chair26 Ibid.


20/63


20

commitments to reform ran the risk of embarrassing ASEAN on the

international scene and alienating key ASEAN Dialogue Partners such as

the United States and the EU. Secondly, given that progress, however

small or slow, is being made in the country, denying Myanmar's

chairmanship desire may disincentive any further efforts and endanger the

progress made so far. Whereas Myanmar's attempt to chair ASEAN in

2006 was easily denied (or foregone) following intense international

scrutiny and criticism, the same reasoning is difficult to apply now given

Myanmar's progress.

As such, the dual problem faced by ASEAN under Indonesia, threatened

to divide the ten member-states over which approach they should take. It

was crucial that any approach taken should (a) reassure key ASEAN

Dialogue Partners and concerned Non-Governmental Organisations that

the principles of democracy and human rights would be upheld and (b)

treat Myanmar's nominally civilian government as an equal member-state

of ASEAN with the right to chair the regional organisation in accordance

with the ASEAN Charter. To Indonesia's credit, the approach taken wasone that served both requirements. In late October, an Indonesian

delegation led by Foreign Minister Natalegawa visited Myanmar to assess

the situation and state of progress made in the country. During the three

day visit, meetings were held with President Thein Sein and his

government ministers; the Speaker of its Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (legislative

assembly); the President of the Myanmar National Human Rights

Commission; and crucially with pro-democracy icon, Aung San Suu Kyi

and other representatives from civil societies.27

As a result of the

27 Eleven Media Group (No Date). Indonesian FM Visits Myanmar. Retrieved from

http://eversion.news-

eleven.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=204:indonesian-fm-

visits-myanmar&catid=42:weekly-eleven-news&Itemid=109


21/63


21

delegation's findings, it was agreed at the 19th ASEAN Summit in Bali,

Indonesia that Myanmar would take the ASEAN Chair in 2014.

Significantly it was announced by Myanmar's Foreign Minister, Wunna

Maung Lwin, that All the ministers support Burma's chairmanship in

2014.28 Moreover, it appeared the United States was also warming to

ASEAN's approach of engaging with Myanmar and giving the Seven-step

Roadmap a chance. This was recently demonstrated when U.S. Secretary

of State, Hillary Clinton became the highest US official in a generation to

visit Myanmar.

4. Bali Concord III

4.1. Background

Having passed the tests of history...[and] become a mature association

capable of creating regional stability and security, and able to increase its

economic strength29, Indonesian intended to drive ASEAN forward by

raising ASEAN's regional organisation's international profile and by

transforming it into a regional organisation that was able to respond andcontribute solutions to key global issues. Before tabling the Bali Concord

III, President Yudhoyono declared,

I believe ASEAN is able to respond to global dynamics...ASEAN

wants to play a bigger role...to reach out to the world.30

28 Bangkok Post (2011, November 16). ASEAN Ministers 'to approve' Burma as 2014

Chair. Retrieved fromhttp://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/266498/asean-

ministers-to-approve-burma-as-2014-chair29 Antara News (2011, November 18). ASEAN showing increasing problem-solving

capability. Retrieved from http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/77700/asean-

showing-increasing-problem-solving-capability30 Ibid.


22/63


22

This global dynamics included but were not limited to the Arab Spring,

Eurozone economic crisis, scarcities in food energy and water, climate

change, natural disasters and so forth.31 The reasoning behind Indonesia's

intentions for ASEAN was not only limited to their belief in the regional

organisation's abilities; or the current rosy outlook the Asia-Pacific region

as a whole finds itself in; but also by a fear of the past. Possibly with the

painful memories of the Asian Financial Crisis which took place in the late

1990s in mind, President Yudhoyono warned that ASEAN must never

become a passive actor victimised by global problems from external

sources.

32

It was in this framework that Indonesia's proposed Bali Concord III

pledged ASEAN to a number of commitments to be achieved by 2022.

Namely, they were to: increasingly speak in a common voice on

international matters of mutual concern at related international forums; to

enhance ASEAN's capacity to respond and contribute solutions to those

global matters; and to empower the ASEAN Secretariat so that it is able to

support the vision and development of the ASEAN Community in a globalcommunity of nations.

33

4.2. Areas of concerns

31 Yudhoyono, Susilo Bambang. (2011, November 17). Pidato Pembukaan KTT ke-19

ASEAN. Retrieved from

http://www.presidenri.go.id/index.php/pidato/2011/11/17/1749.html32 Antara News (2011, November 17). 'That is ASEAN's Contribution to the world':

President. Retrieved from http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/77655/that-is-

aseans-contribution-to-thesworld-president33 Nhan Dan Online (2011, November 18). ASEAN leaders sign third Bali Concord.

Retrieved from

http://www.nhandan.com.vn/cmlink/nhandan-online/homepage/world/asean-leaders-

sign-third-bali-concord-1.321756#pQqdAEyvJxzA


23/63


23

Whilst it is too early to tell whether or not the commitments stated in the

Bali Concord III will be able to meet Indonesia's intentions for ASEAN, a

closer inspection reveals a number of areas of concern. Four are of

particular note.

4.2.1 How will ASEAN adopt a single ASEAN position?

Firstly the pledge for ASEAN to increasingly speak in a common voice by

adopting a more coordinated, cohesive and coherent position on global

issues of common interest and concern34 is fraught with uncertainties.

How exactly will ASEAN reach a common position? A media releaseaccompanying copies of the Bali Concord III vaguely explained ASEAN

's intention to build on current practice to identify those key global

issues of common interest and concern. Once identified, they would then

enhance ASEAN coordination and cooperation on these issues at related

international forums.35

Unfortunately, the explanation does little to dispel

our uncertainties. This is especially true when compared to the EU's

institutionalised mechanisms found in the shape of the EU High

Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (in

other words an EU Foreign Ministry).

4.2.2. Can ASEAN adopt a single ASEAN position?

A more critical uncertainty refers to whether ASEAN can even reach a

single ASEAN position on global issues of common interest and concern

which would benefit all ASEAN Member States and its peoples

34 Bali Concord Declaration on ASEAN Community in a Global Community of Nations,

2011. Retrieved from

http://www.aseansec.org/documents/19th%20summit/Bali%20Concord%20III.pdf35 The Brunei Times (2011, November 18). ASEAN leaders ink Bali Concord III.

Retrieved from http://www.bt.com.bn/news-national/2011/11/18/asean-leaders-ink-

bali-concord-iii


24/63


24

[emphasis added]. Would the global economic crisis interest the smaller

markets of Cambodia and Laos as much as Singapore and Malaysia?

Would the War on Terror interest Myanmar and Vietnam as much as

countries hit by terrorists acts such as Indonesia, Thailand and the

Philippines? And would one-party state Vietnam be as interested in the

Middle East's Arab Spring as democratic and Muslim-majority Indonesia?

The wording employed in the Bali Concord III is rather indicative. The

use of the terms a more coordinated, cohesive and coherent ASEAN

position is significantly different and less certain when compared to the

EU's more definitive Common Foreign and Security Policy [emphasesadded]. On the one hand this should not be surprising as the two regional

organisations adopt different systems for decision-making:

intergovernmental for ASEAN and supranational for EU. Thus, the pledge

for a more coordinated, cohesive and coherent ASEAN position may

merely reflect the state-centric nature that runs deep in the ASEAN

mindset. However it also reflects an acknowledgement, on ASEAN's part,

of the inherent difficulties of getting ten different countries with ten

different national interests and foreign policies to agree.

This was clearly in evidence when the US President, Barack Obama's

recent announcement that 2,500 U.S. troops would be permanently based

in Darwin, Australia caused a split within ASEAN. Seen as a move to

counter the growing threat posed by China in the Asia-Paicific region,

countries such as the Philippines strongly supported the move, Malaysia

and Singapore took a neutral stance, whilst Indonesia objected.3637

36 Inquirer (2011, November 17). ASEAN Summit spotlights Myanmar, maritime

dispute. Retrieved from http://globalnation.inquirer.net/18633/asean-summit-

spotlights-myanmar-maritime-dispute-237 Tempo (2011, November 18). Obama-SBY Bahas 2500 Marinir di Darwin.

Retrieved from http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2011/11/18/118367345/Obama---


25/63


25

4.2.3. Is ASEAN well-prepared to contribute to solving key global issues?

The pledge for an enhanced ASEAN capacity that is able contribute and

respond to key global matters brings up a number of questions. The Bali

Concord III states ASEAN's contribution shall take the form of promoting

mediation initiatives and to actively participate in post-conflict

peacekeeping and building activities based on the readiness of respective

ASEAN member-states. Arguably, we should pay particular attention to

the caveat referring to readiness, as it opens the possibility for some

countries not to participate at all whilst others to carry out the lion-share of

peacekeeping and building efforts. As before, the caveat perhaps reflect

the differences found among the capabilities of the ten member-states.

Indonesia for example with a much larger military or Singapore and

Malaysia with the better-equipped ones are likely to contribute more then

Laos to such endeavors. We should also wonder how an ASEAN

peacekeeping effort would operate. Will it be individual member states

operating on behalf of ASEAN or would it be a combined effort perhaps

involving all ten member-states? It should be remembered that anIndonesian proposal for an ASEAN Peacekeeping Force in 2003 faltered

due to outright opposition by other member-states. Thus, it remains to be

seen how ASEAN plans to carry out peacekeeping missions without its

own peacekeeping force.

4.2.4. Will the ASEAN Secretariat be properly empowered?

Lastly, the pledge to empower the ASEAN Secretariat is ambitious given

some of its shortcomings. The Bali Concord III calls for a strengthened

ASEAN Secretariat with the capacity to support the vision and

SBY-Bahas-2500-Marinir-di-Darwin


26/63


26

development of the ASEAN Community in a global community of

nations. In other words, the ASEAN Secretariat has the responsibility of

ensuring the implementation of ASEAN's positions on key global issues.

Alarmingly, the ASEAN Secretariat is only staffed by approximately 200

officials to cover a region with a combined population of over 600 million.

A report by the Asian Development Bank in 2007 noted that,

Due to budgetary constraints...in the immediate and medium-term

future, there is no plan to substantially increase the level of

staff of ASEC [ASEAN Secretariat]...despite the growing number

of ASEAN meetings.

The aforementioned budgetary constraint lies in the fact that ASEAN

member-states contribute just US$1 million each to fund its operations.

Nevertheless, even if the ASEAN Secretariat were to be adequately

funded and staffed, due to the intergovernmental nature of ASEAN, it is

unlikely the ASEAN Secretariat will have the kinds of power the EU has

over its member-states. More likely, the ASEAN Secretariat will be given

the monitory role of preparing progress reports for the ASEAN Summit to

act upon. This though is rather unsatisfactory as it is usually the case that

individual member-states report on their own activities with the ASEAN

Secretariat merely gathering those reports and combining them into one

final report. This makes a thorough and objective report that highlights

weaknesses and failings unlikely.

From the above, it is clear that although visionary and lofty in intention,

the Bali Concord III requires further work and perhaps time to address the

uncertainties surrounding it.


27/63


27

5. Conclusion

This article has shown that prior to Indonesia's assumption of the ASEAN

Chair for 2011, commentators had held great hope and expectation over

the direction and fate the regional organisation would take. The article

explained that the two key factors of Indonesia's rising profile and past

history had fuelled optimism. It was then pointed out that Indonesia had

generally been seen as a successful chair after hosting two ASEAN

Summits, calming the Thai-Cambodian border conflict and resolving the

issue of Myanmar's 2014 chairmanship ambitions. Briefly, Indonesia's role

in the latter two cases were described before the article turned its attention

to the Bali Concord III. Seen as an example of the new thinking, ideas and

programs that Indonesia has injected into ASEAN, the article first

described how through the Bali Concord III, Indonesia intended to

transform ASEAN into one that could respond and contribute to key

global issues. This was explained on the belief that ASEAN had passed

the test of history, that the Asia-Pacific region was viewed from a

positive outlook, and that ASEAN was driven by the fear of being apassive actor and victim to external global problems. Three key

commitments the Bali Concord III pledged ASEAN to were then outlined.

They were for an increasingly common ASEAN position on key global

issues, for an enhanced ASEAN capacity so that the regional organisation

could respond and contribute to global key issues, and to empower the

ASEAN Secretariat so that it could support and develop the ASEAN

Community in a global community of nations. However the article

identified a number of areas of concerns found within the Bali Concord

III. Question marks were raised over how ASEAN intends to reach a

single ASEAN position on key global issues and whether it is even

possible to reach a single ASEAN position given the difficulties of


28/63


28

working with ten different countries with ten different national interests

and foreign policies; the level of readiness and willingness. Further

question marks were raised over the level of preparation among the ten

member-states to contribute to the solutions to key global issues and

whether the ASEAN Secretariat can be properly empowered given its

limited staff numbers and the budgetary constraints it operates under.

Overall, while Indonesia's chairmanship of ASEAN has been generally

successful and the Bali Concord III not only promises much but also

continues the country's proud reputation of introducing new ideas,

thoughts and programs into ASEAN, it is clear that more work is needed.

It is hoped that with time and once these issues are addressed, Indonesia

alongside its fellow member-states can proudly and truly stand as an

ASEAN Community in a global community of nations. ***


29/63


29

Security Dilemma in South East

Asia:Between the Two Major Powers

Endah Bayu Purnawati, Alumni of the University of

Indonesia and the Australian National University (ANU)

Prior to the East Asia Summit in November 2011 in Bali, Indonesia,

President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard

announced a plan to deepen military cooperation of the two countries by

establishing a United States (US) base equipped with 2,500 US marines in

Darwin, Australias Northern Territory. The issue created debates and

speculations within the region. Even though both President Obama and

Prime Minister Gillard have assured President Susilo BambangYudhoyono and the rest of the ASEAN members that the plan posed no

threat to any nation in the region, many have said that the US move to

station its troops in Darwin, only 820 kilometres from Indonesian territory,

should be closely monitored. It is inevitable that this matter will perpetuate

threat perceptions among countries in the region.

Containing China?

Many have said that the growing US military presence in the region is

aimed at containing the rising influence of China. China has obviously

grown into a great economic as well as military power. With the recent

tensions of the claimant states over territorial disputes in the South China


30/63


30

Sea, many see China as increasingly aggressive towards the region. Recent

clashes over territorial disputes between China and the Philippines and

Vietnam have demonstrated Chinas aggressive policy. As can be seen in

the map below, China also has territorial disputes with Brunei Darussalam,

Malaysia and also Indonesia in South China Sea. This aggressiveness is in

line with Chinas increasing military budget, which has trebled since the

1990s. Even though there is no exact figure for Chinas military budget, it

is estimated that it reached US$91.5 billion in 2011, making this countrys

military budget second only to the US (Tempo, 2011).

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15273007

China definitely opposed the US plan of stationing additional marines inthe northern part of Australia, saying this action would increase tension in

the region. Spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, Liu Weimin,

said that When developing cooperation, a state should also consider other

states interest, peace and stability in the region. (Tempo, 2011). Chinas


31/63


31

news agency Xinhua criticized such a move by saying that every state in

the region has a good reason to question the US ambition, and views that

it was no surprise that the US tried to seek hegemony status in the region,

in line with their aspiration as a global power (Republika, 2011). As a

response, President Hu Jintao has instructed Chinas navy to speed up the

development of its military armed forces and prepare for warfare to

protect its national security (Republika, 2011). In addition, China will

conduct regular military exercises in the South Pacific. This is an annual,

planned, routine drill. It is not directed at any specific country or target

and is in keeping with relevant international laws and practices. Chinasfreedom of navigation and other legal rights should not be obstructed,

Reuters said, quoting Chinas Defence Ministrys website (Reuters, 2011).

President Obama denied that the plan was aimed at China. In his speech

before the Australian parliament, he reiterated that Asia will largely

define whether the century ahead will be marked by conflict or

cooperation. .. I have, therefore, made a deliberate and strategic decision

that, as a Pacific nation, the US will play a larger and long-term role in

shaping this region and its future..In the Asia-Pacific in the 21st

century,

the US is all in. (The Straits Times, 2011). His statement strongly

demonstrates the intention of the US to strengthen its long-established

presence in the region. As a matter of fact, the US is currently deploying

more than 100,000 troops outside the US. In the Asia-Pacific region, the

US has a military presence in Singapore, Thailand, South Korea, Japan,

the Philippines, Guam, Indonesia and Australia (and small deployment in

half a dozen others). The Southeast Asia region is encircled by the US. For

the US, adding more troops in Darwin is just another signal that the US is

still a dominant global power, able to enlarge its military projection

worldwide and demonstrates how Asia-Pacific is pivotal for the US.


32/63


32

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-15715446

When President Obama assured the neighbouring countries that the US

military presence in Darwin is intended, among other things, to deal with

emergency situations, including possible natural disasters, many analysts

and international observers did not believe his argument. This was

accentuated by the fact that just a few months before the East Asia

Summit in November 2011, Timor Leste signed an agreement to buy two

Chinese warships equipped with 30 millimetre cannon. In addition,


33/63


33

according to Hikmahanto Juwanaan international law expert from the

University of IndonesiaChina has reportedly proposed the establishment

of a military base in Timor Leste, Indonesias neighbour (Gatra, 30

November 2011). While Timor Leste has yet to approve the proposal,

China has continued to assist Timor Leste by supporting the development

of its state offices and public facilities (Bataviacase, 2011).

US re-engagement policy with the region was not a sudden decision. The

plan to station 2,500 marines in Darwin is part of efforts to make strategic

alliances with the countries in the region. On a few occasions, the US hasreiterated its commitment to be involved in the region. In November 2009,

President Barack Obama declared that As an Asia-Pacific nation, the US

expects to be involved in the discussions that shape the future in this

region. (The Straits Times, 2011). At the ASEAN Regional Forum in

Hanoi, July 2010, Secretary of the State Hillary Clinton announced a

major shift in US policy on the South China Sea. Describing the sea as

pivotal, she announced that Washington was prepared to play a more

proactive role in helping to resolve territorial disputes in the South China

Sea.

A series of events have also demonstrated how the US continues to foster

relationships with countries in the region, but it is hard to accept that they

were not aimed containing China. In July 2010, the US and South Korea

conducted a military exercise involving the aircraft carrier USS George

Washington, which gave the opportunity to display US military power.

Also in July, the US lifted a ban of more than a decade on military contact

with an elite Indonesian special forces unit (Kopassus)(The New York

Times, 2010).In August 2010, Vietnam and the US held their first joint

naval exercise, a move seen as a reminder to China that it was not the only


34/63


34

big player in the region (The Straits Times, 2011). Two months before the

ASEAN Summit in November 2011, China officially launched its first

aircraft carrier. This carrier is seen as part of Chinas broader naval

modernisation programme, showing to the whole world that Chinas

maritime mobility is expanding drastically and that China is in the

process of acquiring capability to control the South China Sea as well as

the East China Sea (Guardian, 10 August 2011). In response, a week

later, USS George Washington paid a second visit to Vietnam for the

commemoration of the normalization of the US-Vietnam relationship

(Gatra, 2011).

In June 2011, the US helped the Philippines strengthen its navy by

providing a destroyer and in November 2011, both signed a declaration

calling for multilateral talks to resolve maritime disputes, in sharp contrast

to Chinas policy of bilateral negotiations in settling the issue of the South

China Sea (The Straits Times, 2011). Also in November 2011, in a joint

statement with President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President Obama

announced a US plan to supply 24 refurbished F-16C/D fighter aircraft to

Indonesia, which will boost Indonesias capabilities, including keeping an

eye on the situation in the South China Sea (Media Indonesia, 2011).

The above confirms that the US has been consolidating its presence and

position in the Asia-Pacific region, showing that the Asia-Pacific is crucial

for the US and that the US will not let the region be dominated by a single

major power. Though it is said that it was not specifically aimed at China,

it is evident that the series of engagement policies were directed against

China. Both the Philippines and Vietnam have disputes with China, as

well as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia and Indonesia, in the South China

Sea and therefore the US presence in those countries can be seen as a soft


35/63


35

warning to China, reasserting that the US is ready to jump in to the

disputes should China act aggressively in the region.

Between the Two Major Powers

With Southeast Asian countries encircled by the US in the region and

facing China in the north, ASEAN countries seem to be stuck in between

the two major powers. It is important to note that though it may not be

openly expressed, some ASEAN countries have felt relieved with the US

intention to re-engage with the region, especially those countries with

competing claims against China in the South China Sea.

As stated by the Philippines presidential secretary Ricky Carandang, If

you are asking me in general how I view the increased engagement of the

US in Australia and the region, we view the presence of the Americans

here, ....as ultimately a stabilising force. (The Sunday Times, 2011).

Vietnam has also signed its first defence cooperation agreement with the

US and held joint exercises this year. A US vessel visited Vietnam for the

first time in more than 30 years and USS George Washington came back

just a week after China launched its first aircraft carrier. This recent re-

engagement policy of the US with the region matches with the reception

of some Southeast Asian countries for US presence, in which many have

argue that this was in a framework to balance Chinas rising presence.

Indonesia, as the chair of ASEAN 2011, seems to be neutral and tries to

remind the others to avoid open conflict. As Marty Natalegawa has said,

ASEAN will not let the region become a competition arena for countries

who consider themselves as big powers. (Antaranews, 2011). He further

added that Indonesia will not be trapped in that kind of situation. We now

have a clear scenario, referring to ASEANs resolution in solving South

China Sea disputes.


36/63


36

However, many domestic analysts may not be as optimistic as the Foreign

Minister that the US troops in Darwin are only for military exercises and

cooperation for disaster mitigation response. It is hard not to relate this

series of events as a response to Chinas rising power in the South China

Sea. International relations analyst from the University of Indonesia,

Hariyadi Wiryawan, argued that Indonesia should carefully look at the US

plan to station its troops in Darwin because their mobilization will have a

direct impact on Indonesia. Taking as an example, he said that those US

troops will need a way to go back and forth from Darwin to the USmilitary bases in the Philippines and elsewhere and would have to go

through Indonesia. This makes it difficult for us. If we agree to [the US

request to go through via Indonesia], China will consider us as pro [US]

and vice versa, he said (Media Indonesia, 2011).

US-China rivalry in the region has hemmed ASEAN members between

the two major powers. ASEAN members security threat perceptions

coming from China may have driven them to invite the US to the region.

Participation by the US (and Russia) in the recent East Asia Summit

(EAS) was on the endorsement of ASEAN members. Pavin

Chachavalpongpun views that It is generally believed USs participation

will minimize Chinas increasing domination of the EAS. ...This situation

coincided with the rise of China, both economically and militarily. (Pavin

Chachavalpongpun, 2010).

With Indonesia positioned between the US and China rivalry in the region,

analysts have argued that Indonesia should remain neutral and maintain its

foreign policy principles of free and active in handling this matter. In

the broader perspective, it is also important for ASEAN countries,


37/63


37

including those claimant states involved in the South China Sea dispute

with China, to remain neutral in the competition between US and China in

the region and adhere to the already agreed Code of Conduct in solving

the South China Sea disputes.

Conclusion

The dynamics within the region in responding to the US plan to station

2,500 marines in northern Australia represents a dominant realist

paradigm in international relations thinking. Hans Morgenthau argues

that international politics, like all politics, is a struggle for power. As thestate is the main actor and sovereignty is its distinguishing trait, the

interaction between states in the region is characterised by a constant

security dilemma, in which a military preparation of one state can create

an uncertainty in the mind of another as to whether the preparation is for

defensive or offensive purposes (Baylis and Smith, 2005).

With the rise of Chinas economic and military power, recent clashes in

the South China Sea with some Southeast Asian countries have created a

security dilemma among ASEAN members, seeing China as increasingly

offensive toward the region. The US, which considers the region as

crucial, felt it necessary to be present in the region to contain the rising of

Chinas influence. This balance of power should be managed well to

avoid an open conflict in the region.

ASEAN should be neutral in face of the rivalry between these two global

powers in the region. With some ASEAN members involved in the South

China Sea dispute with China, it is important for all claimant states to

resist making any movements that could create tension. They should

strictly obey the agreed code of conduct in managing the disputes. The


38/63


38

effort to engage China and the US in a multilateral framework through a

dialogue within ASEAN should be continued to keep peace and stability

of the region.

US presence in the region is pivotal for US foreign policy in the Asia-

Pacific. US presence in the region is an effort to balance Chinas

increasing power. Nevertheless, this kind of Cold War type of security

dilemma should not escalate into an open conflict. Both sides must have

been calculating that the cost of having an open war would only bring

great loss to them and the rest of the region. It is much more logical that,despite some competitive presence, cooperation on issues like trade,

financial stability, energy security, and climate change will benefit all

stakeholders in the region.***

References

Antaranews, Tentara Amerika di ASEAN, sesuatu yang tak

mengganggu, 17 November 2011,

http://www.antaranews.com/berita/285220/tentara-amerika-di-asean-

suatu-yang-tak-mengganggu

Bataviacase, Diam-diam Cina kuasai Timor Leste, 23 November 2011,

http://bataviase.co.id/node/883143

Chua Chin Hon, Reality check over US pivot to the East, The Straits

Times, 26 November 2011.

Elisabeth Bumiller and Norimitsu Onishi US lifts ban on Indonesiaspecial forces unit, The New York Times, 22 July 2010 fromhttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/world/asia/23military.html

Erdy Nasrul and Mansyur Faqih, Pasukan AS di Darwin lemahkan posisi

Indonesia,Republika, 22 November 2011.


39/63


39

Gatra, Terjepit di antara dua kepentingan, 30 November 2011.

Guardian, China's first aircraft carrier launches with pride amid regional

tensions, 10 August 2011, taken from

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/10/china-aircraft-carrier-

launch

John Baylis and Steve Smith (eds.). The Globalization of World

Politics.New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Media Indonesia, Indonesia Perlu Soroti Manuver AS, 18 November 2011.

Media Indonesia, AS Siapkan Hibah 24 Unit F-16 untuk Indonesia, 8December 2011,

http://www.mediaindonesia.com/read/2011/12/12/282431/284/1/_AS_

Siap_Hibahkan_24_Unit_F-16_untuk_Indonesia

Republika, Asia Pasifik jadi prioritas AS, 18 November 2011.

Republika, Hu minta AL Cina Siaga, 8 December 2011.

Reuters, China announces naval drills amid regional fears of its growing

reach, 23 November 2011,

http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFL4E7MN1KS20111123

Pavin Chachavalpongpun, How the US plays into the East Asia Summit

for ASEAN, East Asia Forum, 17 August 2010, from

http://www.eastasiaforum.org

Tempo, Penyeimbang di Laut Cina Selatan, 4 December 2011.

Zakir Hussain, ASEAN nations welcome US pivot, The Sunday Times,

27 November 2011.


40/63


40

Workshop Peace Education:

Breaking the Stereotypes,Building Trust in Jakarta and

Jayapura

Tatat Sukarsa, Researcher, The Habibie Center

The workshop Peace Education: Breaking the Stereotype, Building Trust

in Jakarta and Jayapura was a series of activities held as part of a Peace

Education Program by The Habibie Center in cooperation with USAID

and the SERASI (Engaging Citizens in Peace) project. The aim of the

program of workshops and run initially through schools in order to focus

on the young generation was to change the perception and distrust that

have characterized the relationship between Papua and Jakarta over a long

period of time. Papua, with its abundance of problems, from poverty and

malnutrition, lack of health and educational facilities, the prevalence of

HIV/AIDS, separatism, to the high frequency of conflicts there, while

Jakarta (the central government) is perceived as implementing policies

that the Papuans feel are inadequate and/or had not yet improved the

quality of the peoples lives.

A total of eight workshops were held, at four high schools in Jakarta and

four high schools in Jayapura, between October 13 and November 11,

2011. Specially selected university students in Jakarta and

Jayapuraparticipated in a training of the trainers program, at which they


41/63


41

conveyed the substance of the impending discussions. In the training of

the trainers sessions theytrainers studied both the contents of the

substances of the materialsthey wished to would convey and the bestway

of disseminatingconveying the information.materials.

The four workshops in Jayapura workshop wereas held on November 8-

11, 2011, at four high schools, the State High School 4, Entrop,Jayapura;

the State High School 2, Serui,Jayapura; the PGRI High School in the

village of Yabansai, Heram District, Jayapura, and the Yapis Waena High

School, Waena, Jayapura.

Workshop at the State High School 2 Jayapura

The workshop at the State High School 2 Jayapura was held on November

8-9, 2011, was led by four trainers. The students who participated in the

workshop were those who had previously been selected from and the best

students in their school, and werewith a mixture of boththe migrant and

indigenous students. The mixture was something uneasily composed since

the indigenous students were in the minority compared to the majority ofmigrant students.

The first material on at the day one was The Nations Plurality and

Understanding the Papuan Society. At first the students were

quietinactive and looked self consciousbashful. But the trainers kept on

trying to evokeinvite the students response and to maintain their attention.

activeness. The trainers involved the students in a game of Saving the

Ship and this game had succeeded in melting the awkwardness and the

timidity of the students. They returned to become the merry and plain high

school students, putting forth a ray of stereotypes connected to the figures

in ofthe game.


42/63


42

On the second day, the trainers conveyed the substance of Breaking the

Stereotype, Building the Trust and To Have a Stance on the Role of the

Mass Media Role in Times of Conflict. From the outset, tThe students, at

the time had started with high level of werehighlyenthusiasticm, in

participating in the lectures of their trainers. At the end of the workshop

some students said that they were very content to receivein receiving the

peace education since it was closely connected towith their daily life.

Workshop at the State High School 4 Jayapura

It was carried out on the same two days, November 8-9, 2011. The HighSchool 4 was one of the distinguished schools in Jayapura. Students who

were educated there were those who had above average intelligence and

scores. For this program, the school sent 40 students organizesrs of

byOSIS (the schools student association)Organization of Internal School

Students) who were in fact the more active and intelligent in their school.

The composition of those atendingin the workshop was well

enoughbalanced between indigenous and migrant students.

The first day workshop ran smoothly and timely. The students talked

again about The Nations Plurality and Understanding the Papuan

Society and the trainers lectures were well conveyed their lecture well,

which the students responded positively enough. The High School 4

students were in fact very active in responding toon their trainers lectures.

In fact,tThey actively put forward questions when they felt they needed

more explanation. Their attentivenessct was verymore apparent when they

participated in the Save the Ship game. They were very expressive and

enjoyed the game very much, although there were two students who thatat

the beginning they did not really take partmingle in the game. As the time

went on, however, they,too,became fully active two students became fully


43/63


43

active in the game. They could also understand the values contained in of

playing thise game.

The second day of the workshop also ran smoothly too. The substance of

Breaking the Stereotype, Building Trust received a positive response.

Some students contendedalleged that the material was quite relevant given

their withthe very plural character student ofcondition intheir school. The

substance of the lectureopened their minds to better appreciate more other

people who happened to be weredifferent from with them. The material

To Have a Stance on the Role of the Mass Media Role in Times of

Conflict was felt as quite in line with Papuas condition, since, so far,

Papua was always reported in the mass media as a scaryfrightening

conflict-prone area. The students conveyed that Papuas condition was

really not as bad as reported by the mass media.

The workshop was concluded with a discourse on the students the

deliverance ofimpressions of the programand the lessons learned.message

of the students on the program. One of them commentedalleged that

because of the remotenessfar demographical location of the population of

Papua from Jakarta, that they were rarely got important additional

information such as what this program gave.like such a program. They

hoped that in the future there would be many more similar programs for

the schools in Papua.

Workshop in Yapis Waena High School, Jayapura

The wWorkshop at the inYapis High School was held on November 9,

2011, from 09:00 to 15:00. When the The Habibie Center team arrived,

the Yapis High School students who were to wouldparticipate in the

workshop were had allready been readyto start. Although Yapis is a school

managed by an Islamic foundation, but its students wereare varied, almost


44/63


44

balanced between the indigenous Papuans who were mostly Christians,

and migrants. The participants of the workshop were the eleventh graders.

The workshop materials were conveyed well by the trainers. Although

there was a little bit ofconcern that the Yapis students would not be

responsive, the facts showed otherwise.the others. The substances of the

Indonesian Nations Plurality and the Understanding the Papuan

Society were listened to attentively by the students. They were also

adroitly answering questions and asking for more information whenever

they felt there was something unclear. Entering the Save the Ship game,

the students enthusiasm rose even more; they concentrated fully on

following the game. At the end of the workshop, the students conveyed

their impressions and messages. From their opinion, they looked very glad

in receiving the additional materials that would be useful to them in their

daily life.

The Workshop at the PGRI High School Jayapura

As had been previously explained, this was the final at last the workshopof the four-day program, the attendance at the PGRIO High School, was

held a day on November 10and 11 2011, from 09:00 to 11:00, was quite

good and very enthusiastic. Forty students were all ready in the class

roomfor the commencement of the lectures. However, unlike the situation

A bit different from the students at the other schools, the number of the

indigenous students of the PGRI High School exceededwas more than the

number of migrants.

The He delivertance of the two materials on atthe first day of the

workshop, the Indonesian Nations Plurality and Understanding the

Papuan Society receivedgot a very good response. At first the students

looked bashful to fire opinion or questions, but the trainers kept enticing


45/63


45

the students to be active. At last they succeeded in making the students

more active. When the Save the Ship game started, the students were

glad and enjoyed the game. So too with the when materials on of

Breaking the Stereotype and Taking a Stand on the Role of the Mass

Media in Times of Conflict, when the students said that the materials

were very new and that they had never heardthey got them before; that the

materials were very useful and enriched their understanding. They hoped

in the future there would be many more such activities atin their school.

A teacher who was assigned to supervise the activity explained that the

PGRI High School students were indigenous Papuans whose families

prosperity was lacking but they were very enthusiastic in being educated.

It is clear from the holding of the workshops at the four schools in

Jayapura that the Papuans main necessity is for good qualitythe qualified

and free education, because it isonly through the education that they will

be areable to overcome their struggle top make for theimprovements in of

their lives. ***


46/63


46

The Existance of the Traditional

Market in Indonesia: a Reflection

of Capitalistic Bureaucracy in the

New Order Era

Ana Sabhana Azmy, Graduate Student of Master Program of

Political Science of the University of Indonesia,Member of Political Literacy Institute,

Teacher at Poor Urban Society at Rawajati Ciliwung, Jakarta

Introduction

Being well known as a system in governance, bureaucracy has been quite

familiar in our daily life. Contemplating a bit deeper about bureaucracy,

we are suddenly struck to a difficult system, high cost and a needlessly

long process. Although many Ministries of Indonesia in the reformation

era have been spreading out the word Reformation of the Bureaucracy

(even a ministry has changed its name by adding Bureaucratic Reform),

but it doesnt alter the situation very much. It has not been able to change

the fundamental of the reform: tochange the mindset of the civil servants

into what the reform is about. Even now, it has only been redirected by

giving new meaning to the Reform of the Bureaucracy: numeracy,

meaning, an increase in the salary.


47/63


47

By its strong authority in the New Order, bureaucracy was not just a rule

application, but a rule making, whereby a bureaucrat that sat in the

government system could hold onto a full power by establishing rules that

were made in the name of his interest. In the New Order era, the

bureaucracy followed the capitalistic system. The government had applied

a full market system, carried out very flexible rules toward foreign

investors where only the red plate banks were still owned by the

government. The rest, the private banks, almost all had been absorb by

foreign banks. In a way, such a policy had produced a better result in

terms of economic achievements than before, even after the New Ordercollapse. Besides, there were also benefits from the capitalistic system,

whereas employment opportunities were opened up and the economy ran

faster. On the other hand, the manpower absorption did not empower or

make the workers self reliant, but used them only for the sake of partial

interests, such as investors and bureaucrats.

The existence of modern market networks led by foreign investors, could

not be separated from the capitalistic bureaucracy in the New Order. Atthe time, the foreign investors got better attention from the New Order

government because the modern market raised profits from tax for the

State. Besides, the market could also absorb many workers at lower cost.

This was ironic with the poor condition of the traditional markets that

declined gradually both in quantity and quality. Beren Gintings in his book

entitled Ekonomi Kerakyatan, Plus Minus Kebijakan Pemerintahan Orde

Baru (Peoples Economy, Pluses-Minuses of the New Order

Governments Policy) explained that not fixing up the traditional market

condition would only lead to the disappearance of customers. The

traditional markets tended to be smelly, dirty, crowded and muddy also

full of rubbish. In New Order Era, PD Pasar Jaya Jakarta for example used


48/63


48

to have 156 markets that consisted of 97 non-Inpres (non-Presidential

Instruction) markets with 57,702 kiosks and 59 Inpres markets with

26,702 kiosks. With the decline in customers at the traditional markets, the

number of active kiosks at the non- Inpres markets was just 44,665 and at

the active Inpres there were only 20,554 kiosks.

Meanwhile, for the modern (super) market in the 1980s, Jakarta had 30

supermarkets but now they have become 81 markets (Gintings, 2005). The

unsatisfactory condition of the traditional markets was actually a reflection

of the societys weakness in making a bargaining powervis a vis the New

Order policy. The centralized bureaucracy and its favoring of foreign

investors became a factor to explain why ordinary people could not play a

part in such economic competition. In fact, the society economy had the

potential to help the economy in Indonesia withstand economic down-

turns especially the financial-led-economic crises of 1997-1998. It needed

the equal regulation between the existence of traditional and modern

market. There was no clear regulation implemented during the New Order

that attempted to remedy the unclear limitation concerning the existence ofmodern (super) markets.

Traditional Market VS the Modern Market

The domination of the modern (super) market over traditional ones in the

New Order era, was the logical outcome of the countrys development

plan at the time. By the coming of New Order after 1965, it began the big

disclosure of the political economy from the leader. The task of the keyUS-trained economic actors in the New Order, was to rebuild the economy

based on the important role of the private sector and foreign financial

capital (Robison, 1978). By this policy, foreigners dominated all sectors in

Indonesia, such as mining, forestry and others. Priyo Budi Santoso said


49/63


49

that the protection toward the foreign interest in the New Order was

related to the choice of the economic development strategy that was

outward looking (Santoso, 1993). The economic society, however, should

be like what Frans Seda explained, that whatever the position of the

society, as the object or the subject in the economy, the orientation must

always belong to the society. In the New Order era, a shift to the right

occurred. This was indicated by the declaration of the Law on Foreign

Investment (UU Penanaman Modal AsingUU PMA) No 1/1967 and the

Law on Cooperative (UU Koperasi) No 12/1967. At that time, the

winner was the liberal economy. The liberal technocrats, with the fullsupport of the IMF, the World Bank and donor countries that joined in

asthe Inter-Governmental Group on Indonesia (IGGI), led the economic

policy formulation of Indonesia. The goal was economic development that

foreign investors had more easy access to (Gemari, 2011).

In the 1980s, the privatization of development happened. This was forced

by the increasing needs for financial capital, efficiency and technology to

keep the economic development on track. That process was marked by a

liberalization process and its mechanism was deregulation of the economy.

Seda said that the government was hesitant at that time, whether or not the

economic society would become the prime mover of the development

circle. Finally, the choice was that the traditional market that was a part of

the economic society did not get special attention compared to the modern

(super) market. The bureaucracy in the New Order was absolutely

patrimonial and that it was the elites that just shared the legality, causingpolicy discrimination. While the patrimonial bureaucracy dominated38, the

38 The characteristics of patrimonial bureaucratic domination a la Weber: 1.Officials

were filtered based on personal and political criteria; 2. Position was regarded as the

source of wealth or profit; 3. Officials control, either the political or administrative

function, since there was no separation of the production and administrative means; 4.


50/63


50

relations between foreign investors and bureaucrats were marked by a

proper relation meaning the existence of a mutually beneficial

relationship. In the name of reciprocity, the New Order bureaucracy forgot

the existence of the traditional market. Then, what was the implication of

the New Orders policy toward the trader in the traditional market and

what steps were taken in terms of empowering the traditional market?

New Orders Capitalistic Bureaucracy and the Economic Society

Peter M Blau (Blau and Meyer, 1987) wrote that the main characteristics

of the structure of bureaucracy (ideal type) according to Weber are: 1. In

the organization, there is a clear working classification that makes it

possible to give work to the experts and make them responsible and that

this is an unconsciousness of bureaucratic innovation. 2. The office

organization follows the hierarchys characteristics that the lower the unit

in the office the higher its supervising and empowering rights. By that,

there is an authority and that has to be limited. 3. The working

implementation is managed by the abstract roles of system. 4. The elites

ideally have to do their work by formal spirit and not by becoming private.

This is in order that the rational program is run solidly and so on. 5.

Working in a bureaucratic organization is based on a technical

qualification and is protected from the possibility of hiring by one side. 6.

That the pure administrative organization that has a bureaucratic criteria

can achieve the h

Postscript Nov-Dec 2011

Documents

Transcript of Postscript Nov-Dec 2011