Indonesia and Australia are bound together by
a special relationship — a friendship forever defined by Australians’ early
support of Indonesia’s struggle for independence; and one further solidified as
the two nations stood hand in hand in support of one another in overcoming
natural disasters, acts of terror and other common challenges
I believe Australia-Indonesia relations remind that each and
every one of us has the potential to promote change — positive change. And
foreign policy is not an exception.
In the Asia-Pacific region, foreign policy must entail renewing
efforts to maintain the peace and stability that have served the region well.
Many countries in the region have been able to reap a “peace dividend” in the
form of an almost uninterrupted pursuit of economic development, lifting
millions out of poverty.
But what kind of external environment confronts Indonesia
and Australia as the two countries deepen bilateral ties? More specifically,
what are the challenges to the region’s peace and security?
The situation on the Korean Peninsula, for example, has been
perennial in the region’s list of challenges. Risk exponentially increased
recently with the possibility of further nuclear proliferation.
The myriad of territorial disputes in the region is another.
In the East China Sea or the South China Sea, for instance, claimant countries
test the others’ resolve, constantly prodding and seeking to establish facts on
the ground, aimed at extracting acquiescence. Conditions are prone to
miscalculation and incidents can escalate into open conflict. Beyond looms the
risk of new strategic fault lines in the region.
Are we to witness the old Cold War divide replaced by new
tensions and conflict? Will the dynamics of relations between countries in the
region, large and small, have a stabilizing influence in the Asia-Pacific, or
the opposite?
Adding to the complexities is the reality of the virtual
indivisibility of internal and external issues, of internal developments with
regional ramifications. Communal and sectarian conflicts, issues relating to
democratic deficit and trans-boundary or transnational issues, such as
communicable disease, terrorism, human trafficking and people smuggling, are
good examples.
All countries in the region must rise to meet such
challenges. To do so, allow me to highlight three basic responses.
First, we need to transform “trust deficit” into strategic
partnership.
Set aside worst-case assumptions of the other’s intention,
which feed action-reaction, a vicious cycle of increasing tensions and of
deepening distrusts. Essentially, I believe that we should stop in its tracks
the often seemingly relentless rush toward conflict — to end the sense of
inevitability of conflict.
To build trust and confidence, we must establish enhanced
communications — formal and informal, governmental and nongovernmental. The
establishment of lines of communications, especially in times of crisis, are
not signs of weakness or acquiescence; rather they are means to decipher and
convey intent, without prejudicing or sacrificing principled position.
Second, we need a commitment to peaceful settlement of
disputes.
Non-use of force. Placing diplomacy at the forefront.
Aggressively waging peace. I believe that overlapping territorial claims do not
have to equate conflict. This requires, however, a commitment from parties to a
territorial dispute to respect certain codes of behavior or conduct.
In the
South China Sea context, this means the drawing up of a regional code of
conduct between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and China. Elsewhere
it may involve less formal arrangements or understandings. However, the essence
remains: avoid miscalculation or unintended crisis. Settle disputes peacefully.
Third, we must address geopolitical shifts and change.
Change permeates our region. Change and transformation
within countries — political and economic — have ramifications far beyond their
borders. Equally significant has been the transformation of the region’s
economies, turning them to drivers of global economic growth.
As change occurs, we should usher a fresh paradigm in the
region’s interstate relations, one that promotes a “dynamic equilibrium.”
The word “dynamic” reflects recognition that change is
inherent and a constant in the region. It is a natural phenomenon that cannot
be sustainably resisted. At the same time, “equilibrium” reminds that this
state of constant change does not imply an anarchical state of affairs, either
due to the unchecked preponderance of a single state, or due to the disorder or
uncertainty associated with a multipolar region.
Instead, peace and stability in the region should be gained
through the promotion of common security, prosperity and stability. These are
actually common goods for all.
A dynamic equilibrium thus is marked by an absence of
preponderant power, not through the rigidity, rivalry and tensions common to
the pursuit of a balance of power. Instead, it’s built through through respect
of certain principles and norms, reflecting common responsibility in
maintaining the region’s peace and stability.
To reflect such an approach, Indonesia is ready to work
toward an Asia-Pacific or Indo-Pacific treaty of friendship and cooperation. A
commitment by states in the region to build confidence, solve disputes through
peaceful means and promote common security.
A treaty, not unlike the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in
Southeast Asia, which has been such an instrumental part in this region’s
evolution from one marked by conflict to one which is today on the eve of a
community.
This treaty provides flesh and strengthens the commitment
already expressed through the so-called “Bali Principles” on the Principles for
Mutually Beneficial Relations agreed at the East Asia Summit of 2011.
Australia and Indonesia can do so much bilaterally, as well
as for the region and for the rest of the world through our Comprehensive
Partnership.
The way Australia and Indonesia work together in addressing
common challenges can serve as a template for cooperation among nations in
addressing the larger challenges confronting the Asia-Pacific region.
Every accomplishment of this partnership sends a strong
message to the rest of the world: that nations, no matter how different they
are from one another, can work together not only for their mutual benefit but
also for the good of their region and beyond.
Marty Natalegawa is the foreign minister of Indonesia. This
article is adapted from a speech delivered on Monday at Macquarie University in
Australia.
No comments:
Post a Comment