http://thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/building-real-us-indonesia-ties-will-require-greater-study-from-both-sides/278564
June 01, 2009 James Van Zorge Building Real US-Indonesia Ties Will Require Greater Study From Both Sides Since the inauguration of Barack Obama and a state visit by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Jakarta, there has emerged a belief in Indonesian policy-making circles that the US-Indonesia relationship stands to improve significantly. After all, Obama spent part of his childhood years here and his policy agenda of strengthening ties with the Muslim world should - so the thinking goes - result in the expansion and deepening of commercial and diplomatic ties between the two countries. So far, the signs are promising. The Foreign Ministry has initiated a dialogue with Washington on developing a comprehensive partnership agreement that will cover cultural exchanges, security ties, as well as trade and investment. Most recently, Minister Juwono Sudarsono has taken the first step in strengthening defense cooperation by considering major purchases of US-made military hardware. On the US side, Obama's top officials will surely display more diplomacy and tact in its dealings with Indonesia than witnessed under the Bush presidency. More than just talk about terrorism and human rights will also enter bilateral discussions and the United States can be expected to focus on extending aid in the areas of education and health care. Still, a lot of work needs to be done before a major shift in the relationship takes place. The first reason for a more sober assessment of future prospects is that the Obama White House will have little, if any time, to focus on issues related to Indonesia. This is an obvious point, but deserves repeating from time to time. US national security interests in Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, North Korea, Russia and China will occupy a lot of space on the president's agenda. Nuclear proliferation, terrorism, global warming and of course the global financial crisis will also loom large. Obama may have a soft spot for Indonesia and certainly he will be more curious and engaging than his predecessors, but Jakarta should be cautious about high expectations. Another reason is that Washington is, and always has been, relatively ignorant about Indonesian affairs. Compared to the pool of expertise on other large nations in the world - China, Russia and India, for example - the number of people of influence who have a good grasp of Indonesian affairs is scarce indeed. Even in US academia and think tanks, study programs and research efforts on Indonesia are a rarity. Knowledge matters, especially when sensitive issues such as Papua or human rights, for example, are brought to the table. NGOs often fill the vacuum, more often than not with their own negative bias. Unfortunately, it is often the only story that policymakers see beyond the US State Department's own policy briefs. Getting the full story on Indonesia has always been a challenge and until there are more informed minds from which Washington can call upon for its assessments, there will be a continuing risk of poor policy choices being reached and therefore unnecessary tensions appearing in the relationship. If Washington suffers from ignorance and unintended bias, it can be said that the same problems are mirrored in Jakarta. Few policymakers in the executive and legislative branches of the Indonesian government possess expertise on US politics and foreign affairs. Those in responsible positions of formulating policy are, unfortunately, naive about how Washington works, often with disastrous consequences. At times, there is the impression that both countries are tone deaf to each other's actual policy stances, aspirations and intentions. For example, when Indonesian Islamic ulema and their followers have raged in protest against US foreign policy in the Middle East, many policymakers in Washington have mistakenly concluded that those protests reflect mainstream opinion and a genuine dislike and contempt for America in general, often completely missing the fact that Indonesians constitute one of the more moderate and secular-minded Muslim populations in the world. Similarly, there are numerous examples where even sophisticated Indonesian politicians think of Washington as a coherent set of rational players working in some coherent fashion and talking with one voice on foreign affairs. The fact that the US Constitution provides for a separation of powers and checks and balances in policy-making seems to escape most Indonesians, even to the point of absurdity where editorial positions taken in The Washington Post are misconstrued as official US policy. Given the fact that both parties can be reasonably charged with ignorance about each other, the obvious question to be posed then is, what, if anything, can be done to ameliorate the situation? >From Washington's side, the first step that needs to be taken is problem >recognition. In particular, Asia heads inside the departments of state and >defense and the entire intelligence community should pose a few questions: >What do we really know about Indonesia? What lessons can be learned from >failed policies? If we are not getting the full story on Indonesia, what >additional resources do we need to understand the main issues? And finally, is >there a need to think differently about Indonesia than we have in the past - >for example, are there opportunities we are missing that could potentially >serve our mutual interests? In Jakarta, a more proactive approach is needed. Rather than blaming Washington for its lack of expertise on Indonesia, the government should consider engaging the services of public relations and lobbying firms to fill the void as opposed to relying solely on their embassy staff. Many countries - for example China, Taiwan, India, Japan and countless others - realize that their embassies neither possess the resources nor expertise needed to represent effectively their interests and therefore enlist professionals to assist them. Conversely, the Indonesian government should recognize and confess to the limits of its understanding of how American politics really work and invest in the people and resources to create a policy institute that provides perspectives on US foreign policy. Indonesia should look at think tanks such as Russia's Institute for the USA and Canadian Studies and others who fill the void of knowledge and impartial analysis that plagues most governments' foreign policy departments. Both the US and Indonesian governments should also think more ambitiously about providing scholarships to university students for studying the politics and history of each other's country. Educational exchanges not only make for good diplomacy, they can also provide an effective platform for developing deeper ties in the future as students with masters and doctoral degrees often become opinion leaders in the private and public sectors. In the final analysis, the US and Indonesia have taken the right, first step. The multi-tiered partnership agreement that will be unveiled next year is a necessary, but by no means sufficient, means of meeting the objective of strengthening the bilateral relationship. What is needed most now is to start filling the knowledge gap - without that, progress will be limited. James Van Zorge is a partner in Van Zorge, Heffernan & Associates, a business strategy and government relations consulting firm based in Jakarta. He can be reached at vanh...@gmail.com .
