After
a dramatic leadership spill within the Liberal Party of Australia on Monday,
Malcolm Turnbull was elected to replace Tony Abbott as the new Australian prime
minister. Whereas Abbott was the acknowledged leader of the right-wing
conservative bloc within the party, Turnbull is much more a moderate in the
tradition of Australia’s longest-serving prime minister and Liberal Party
founder, Sir Robert Menzies. During two years of Abbott’s prime ministership,
relations between Australia and Indonesia experienced notable oscillations.
Abbott had initially promised better relations with
Indonesia, choosing the Southeast Asian neighbor as his first foreign
destination. In his visit to Indonesia late in September 2013 he promised a
foreign policy of “more Jakarta, less Geneva”. Relations nevertheless started
to deteriorate just two months later when then President Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono recalled the Indonesian ambassador from Canberra in protest of the
alleged bugging of Indonesian top leaders’ phone conversations. Indonesia then
terminated some pivotal cooperation with Australia on military, intelligence
and undocumented migration matters. Cooperation resumed around seven months
later after Australia agreed on a code of conduct, promising that it would not
use its spy agencies in ways that could harm Indonesia’s interests.
Abbott was among the few leaders who attended
President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s inauguration last year. Relations, however,
became strained again on account of continuing differences regarding asylum
seekers. The two leaders, however, did not arrange bilateral talks, although
they attended some multilateral forums together, such as the G20, East Asia
Summit and APEC. Relations reached a new low when Abbott recalled the
Australian ambassador in a protest of the executions of drug convicts Andrew
Chan and Myuran Sukumaran in April 2015.
Indonesian
public perception of Abbott was generally not great. A wide range of government
officials, politicians, academics and non-state actors often expressed
disappointment with Abbott’s unilateralist “stop the boats” policy and his
insensitive statements, such as urging Indonesia to exchange Australia’s
tsunami aid with clemency for Chan and Sukumaran. It is too early to expect
that Turnbull’s rise to power will significantly change the course of relations
between the two neighbors. Turnbull himself rarely mentioned Indonesia in his
political statements, compared to his large number of words on China, Japan and
India.
__________________________Indonesia
should not be too dependent on a particular Australian politician or party. But
there are some pointers that one can identify from Turnbull’s past political
records. In terms of foreign policy issues, there are some signs that Turnbull
is eager to reexamine Australia’s existing foreign policy stance. First, in
contrast to Abbott, who was somewhat skeptical about multilateralism, Turnbull
has progressive views on global issues. As environment minister in the Howard
administration, Turnbull pushed for the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol —
although the protocol was ultimately ratified by the Rudd administration.
Abbott, meanwhile, spurned the protocol and skipped UN climate conferences.
After recent criticism from leaders of Pacific countries on Abbott’s
substandard actions in combating climate change, Turnbull has an opportunity to
revise it by pursuing a more progressive stance on climate change, including
returning to binding international commitments.
Furthermore, Turnbull has a great interest in engaging
rising powers. In one of his speeches he urged Australia to recognize China’s
rising power status, rather than keep pursuing a balancing strategy between the
US and China. Turnbull is concerned about the need to build a regional
architecture that could better accommodate rising powers. Moreover, the economy
will become his top priority — it was also one of the main reasons for Abbott’s
expulsion. Having Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, who retained her position as
deputy leader of the party, Turnbull’s foreign policy will be likely aimed at
advocating forceful trade diplomacy.
On bilateral foreign trade agreements (FTA), Turnbull
seems to be looking at bilateral FTA with India, after the conclusions of
Australia’s FTAs with Japan, Korea and China. Regionally, Australia will focus
on strengthening the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is currently undergoing
intense negotiation. The election of Turnbull may not decisively change
Australia’s foreign policy toward Indonesia in the near term. Turnbull clearly
backed Abbott’s “stop the boats” policy, which became one of obstacles in
Australia-Indonesia ties.
But if the two countries could find common interest on
the three aforementioned issues, relations will likely improve. On climate
change for instance, both Australia and Indonesia are members of the Cartagena
Dialogue, an informal but strategic middle power grouping that could bridge the
interests of various negotiation blocs ahead of the UN Framework Conference on
Climate Change meeting in Paris in December. If Turnbull brings Australia back
to a multilaterally binding commitment on climate change, there will be a great
chance of convergence between the two countries.
On regional architecture, where Turnbull seems to
adopt a more “friendly” approach to rising powers, both countries could
cooperate in either strengthening existing mechanisms through ASEAN Plus and
the East Asia Summit, or exploring possible alternatives that could better
serve the ambitions and aspirations of rising powers. Of course, the relations
will not only depend on change in Australia’s approach to Indonesia but the
other way around as well. In this sense, some of Indonesia’s current
protectionist policies do not help advance relations between the two countries.
The change in beef import quota for instance, has not
only hurt Australian farmers but also made Indonesian consumers suffer from the
skyrocketing price. Economic relations between the two neighbors, however, have
much potential to be strengthened. Australia’s investment in Indonesia is
relatively low compared to that of other countries. With US$29.1 million
investment in Q2 of 2015, Australia is only the 15th largest investor in
Indonesia. The more advanced version of the current Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive
Economic and Partnership Agreement (CEPA), with the possibility of a bilateral
FTA, will enhance economic cooperation between both sides. It is not easy of
course, given the strong anti-FTA sentiment in Indonesia — Indonesia currently
has only two bilateral FTAs (with Japan and Pakistan), the fewest among major
Asian economies. Changes in foreign policy will give rise to some bureaucratic,
parliamentary and public discourse issues, which of course will take some time.
It is also true that given the nature of Australia’s
increasingly stressed political system, which has seen five different figures
serving as prime minister in the last eight years, Indonesia should not be too
dependent on a particular Australian politician or party. But, at the very least,
Indonesian elites will now be dealing with someone who is strikingly different
from the previous prime minister. Indonesian leaders can take some hope from
Turnbull’s more consultative and ready-to-listen leadership style, which could
prove to be the start of a positive transformation in both countries’
relations.
Awidya Santikajaya is a research scholar and Prof
William Maley teaches at the Asia-Pacific College of Diplomacy, both at the
Australian National University
No comments:
Post a Comment