In Washington, inertia often carries the day on even the most
anachronistic policy ideas. Congress proved this axiom on June 5
when appropriators in the House of Representatives slashed and
conditioned the Administration's request to provide military
assistance to Indonesia.
Indonesia today is a large, vibrant democracy and a key piece of
the geostrategic puzzle in Asia. It is also among the United
States' most important partners in the War on Terror. Approached
wisely, the U.S.-Indonesian relationship embodies a convergence of
interests on values, geopolitics, and security that is rare among
U.S. relationships in the developing world.
The House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign
Operations has charted a strikingly unwise course. Under the
leadership of Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY), it has covered its
collective ears to the history of the last decade and has forged
ahead with a policy that ignores reality and the vital American
interests at stake in the region.
Roots of Contention
Military assistance to Indonesia first became a matter of
contention in Washington following the Dili Massacre of 1991, in
which hundreds of protestors in East Timor were murdered by the
armed forces of East Timor's erstwhile ruler, Indonesia. The debate
was stoked in 1999 by the scorched earth reaction of Indonesian
troops and pro-Indonesia militias to East Timor's overwhelming vote
in favor of independence. For good reason, these unconscionable
abuses strained relations between the United States and
Indonesia.
Democracy in Indonesia
But since 1999, the world has been turned upside down. An
emerging, unstable democracy then, Indonesia is now a flourishing
democracy. In October 1999, Indonesia elected a president--albeit
indirectly--for the first time in 50 years. Five years later, an
astounding 350 million votes were cast in three national
elections--including a direct election for president. The final
round of the 2004 presidential election, involving 117 million
voters and 77 percent of eligible voters, was the largest single
election day in history. Among the many remarkable facets of
Indonesia's democracy, the 2004 elections produced 61 women members
of the 550-seat lower house and 27 out of 128 in the upper
house.
Acknowledging that elections do not necessarily equal democracy,
it should also be pointed out that Indonesians have taken to
vigorously exercising their civil liberties. There are 16 political
parties, hundreds of newspapers and magazines, independent
television and radio outlets, and countless web sites commenting on
Indonesian politics. Lively political debate reverberates across
many forums and media. According to Freedom House, Indonesia is the
freest country in Southeast Asia.
Symbolic of Indonesia's progress, in 2005, Indonesian President
Bambang SusiloYudhoyono visited the site of the 1991 Dili Massacre
to pay his respects. The East Timorese Prime Minister reciprocated
by telling his countrymen to "Forget the past and look to the
future." Today, Indonesia and East Timor enjoy a close, cooperative
relationship due in major part to the effort of former president
and independence-hero Xanana Gusmao. The same week that House
appropriators were taking Indonesia to task, in fact, the current
president of East Timor, Jose Ramos Horta, was in Jakarta echoing
the same sentiment offered by his government in 2005, saying, "The
important thing is we don't allow ourselves to be hostage of the
past but look forward with courage."
Despite its searing, up-close experience in the 1990s, East
Timor has come to peace with Indonesia. Yet, its well-meaning
supporters in the U.S. Congress seem unable to acknowledge new
realities.
Strategic Concerns for the United
States
Two other things have changed since 1999.
First, the meteoric rise of China has made the presence
of a strong, U.S.-friendly ASEAN--the association of 10 Southeast
Asian nations on China's strategic doorstep--a critical U.S.
interest. Indonesia, straddling waters that accommodate half of the
world's commercial cargo transit, is an important part of U.S.
geopolitical calculations in its own right. But, as a nation of 235
million people and 17,000 islands, it is also ASEAN's indispensable
power.
Every day, China becomes a more effective competitor for the
region's interests. Particularly since 2002, its focus in Southeast
Asia has shifted from its territorial claims in the South China Sea
to lavishing the region with diplomatic attention. Without due
vigilance, commitment, and wise policy choices, the time is not far
off when the U.S. role as guarantor of regional security and
stability will be up for grabs. The United States needs friends in
the region; and Indonesia, by whole-heartedly embracing universal
democratic ideals, has made being friends as easy as any nation in
the world.
Second, the United States is six years into waging the
good fight on global terrorism. Indonesia and the U.S. share
fundamental interests in this war. Indonesians themselves have been
victims of terrorism. Terrorists have directed major acts of
violence against the country's tourism industry and foreign
communities, killing many innocent foreigners as well as
Indonesians.
For many years, the terrorists have sought to inflame sectarian
divisions in the same way that al-Qaeda has done so effectively
elsewhere in the world. Terrorists have also sought to establish
training beachheads in Indonesia's far-flung territories. But the
terrorists in Indonesia are losing: There have been no major acts
of terrorism in Indonesia since October 2005.
Moderation is in the DNA of Indonesia's national character.
Certainly, there is a battle going on for Indonesia's soul, as is
being waged in much of the Muslim world. But in Indonesia, the
extremists are faced with an extraordinarily resilient foe in
Indonesia's famously syncretic, diverse, and tolerant culture.
Congress can help strengthen the Indonesian government's hand
through assistance and partnership, or it can hamper it by
caveating its assistance. Indonesia will fight the war against
terror without the United States; but American cooperation
certainly improves its prospects. It is in the national interest
for the United States to be there for its natural partners.
Conclusion
None of this is to suggest that the United States does not have
differences with Indonesia. Indeed, Representative Lowey's concerns
about accountability for past human rights abuses and the proper
role of the military are legitimate. But the United States needs to
get to a point where it addresses these concerns with the same
respect it affords other democratic partners, like the Europeans or
the Japanese. Limiting and legally conditioning
military-to-military relations is not the best way to address
differences; it is a page from the past. The recent action by House
appropriators is counterproductive and damaging to vital American
interests in Asia.
Walter Lohman is Director
of The Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation.