tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/marty-natalegawa-7813/articlesMarty Natalegawa – The Conversation2015-08-04T04:29:12Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/455132015-08-04T04:29:12Z2015-08-04T04:29:12ZAustralia-Indonesia relationship is back to ‘normal’, meaning fragile as ever<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90670/original/image-20150803-15159-1q3avxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Julie Bishop recently claimed that the Australia-Indonesia relationship is 'very strong and very good'.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Johannes Christo</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tensions-ease-julie-bishop-to-meet-indonesias-foreign-minister-retno-marsudi-next-week-20150730-ginrsg.html">due to meet</a> her Indonesian counterpart, Retno Marsudi, on the sidelines of an ASEAN foreign ministers’ meeting in Kuala Lumpur later this week. This will be the first face-to-face meeting of Australian and Indonesian ministers since the <a href="https://theconversation.com/bali-nine-poor-political-leadership-creates-lasting-bilateral-problems-37753">execution</a> of Bali Nine duo Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran in April. </p>
<p>The meeting would seem to confirm Bishop’s <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peak-body-lashes-abbott-government-our-business-interests-in-indonesia-harmed-by-bad-diplomacy-20150714-gic4zj.html">recent assertion</a> that the overall Australia-Indonesia relationship was:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… very strong and very good.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It stands in contrast, however, with observations made by two other seasoned observers of the relationship: former Indonesian foreign minister Marty Natalegawa and Australia Indonesia Business Council chair Debnath Guharoy.</p>
<p>Natalegawa argued at a meeting in Canberra in June that relations were at a “key juncture”. Acknowledging that he was no longer privy to details of the relationship, he nonetheless <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australiaindonesia-relationship-at-a-key-juncture-dialogue-needed-on-boats-says-marty-natalegawa-20150629-gi0e90.html">expressed the hope</a> that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… there is somewhere some kind of intensified communications. We cannot afford to let the relationship degenerate into a lower point.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Natalegawa <a href="http://theconversation.com/turnbacks-remain-an-irritant-in-australia-indonesia-relations-former-foreign-minister-natalegawa-44043">asserted</a> that asylum-seeker boat turnbacks were the prime irritant in the relationship. He argued they were unilateral and placed the burden of handling the refugee issue on Indonesia.</p>
<p>Speaking shortly after Indonesia had announced that its import quota of Australian live cattle had been slashed, Guharoy <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peak-body-lashes-abbott-government-our-business-interests-in-indonesia-harmed-by-bad-diplomacy-20150714-gic4zj.html">painted</a> a similarly bleak picture of the relationship. Criticising what he called Australia’s “megaphone diplomacy”, he reported that from his communications with Indonesian government agencies it was clear that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… they are unhappy with Australia. They are not happy with the way we are conducting our diplomacy. The megaphone is not working … the fact that we make decisions unilaterally without consultation and tell them to just deal with the consequences, we just have to conduct our diplomacy better than we have been.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So should we be positive about the relationship, a la Bishop, or critical, alongside Natalegawa and Guharoy?</p>
<p>A bit of both, really. </p>
<h2>Reading the comments in context</h2>
<p>Bishop is clearly correct in pointing to the restoration of high-level contacts as a positive development. The relationship was going nowhere so long as ministers were not talking to each other. And the Australian ambassador to Indonesia, Paul Grigson, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/recalled-ambassador-paul-grigson-returns-to-indonesia-20150609-ghk84i.html">returned to Jakarta</a> in early June.</p>
<p>But these developments, positive though they were, at most simply brought the relationship back to where it had been before the executions. In fact it is probably still behind where it had been then. The forthright way in which the Australian government responded to the executions is likely to be remembered in Jakarta for some time.</p>
<p>Natalegawa’s comments also reflect a reality in Jakarta: that the Australian government’s turnback policy is seen as disrespectful of Indonesia’s national interests.</p>
<p>Jakarta might quietly see some value in the policy. After all, if it became clear that asylum seekers could not use Indonesia as a jumping-off point for Australia, presumably fewer of them would come to Indonesia in the first place. </p>
<p>But, once again, the public announcement of this policy, and the confrontational way in which Indonesia’s interests were dealt with by Canberra, meant that Jakarta saw no option other than to reject the policy. Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-does-not-deny-australia-paid-people-smugglers-to-turn-back-asylum-seeker-boats-20150611-ghm5ru">refusal</a> to confirm or deny reports that crews of asylum seeker boats had been bribed to return to Indonesia only confirmed Jakarta’s position.</p>
<p>Interestingly, there seems to have been very little public attention paid in Indonesia to Labor’s adoption of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/shorten-reveals-suite-of-asylum-seeker-measures-45209">turnback option</a> last month. The Indonesian embassy in Canberra must have reported this development back to Jakarta, so the government must have been aware of it. The main news outlets, though, seem to have passed it by.</p>
<p>However, Natalegawa’s comments also need to be read in the context of his role as foreign minister in former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration – one which was seen in Australia at least as being sympathetic to Australia’s interests and concerns. Last year Natalegawa seemed to be making a pitch to <a href="http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/is-indonesias-next-marty-natalegawa-marty-natalegawa/">continue in office</a> after the presidential elections. If so, he was disappointed, with incoming president Joko Widodo showing <a href="http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2014/09/19/Indonesias-diplomatic-corps.aspx">no interest</a> in appointing him. </p>
<p>There could thus be an element of sour grapes in Natalegawa’s remarks.</p>
<p>Guharoy’s comments reflect that the Australian style of political diplomacy does not go down well in Indonesia. The whole confrontational approach to politics of Australia’s leaders runs counter to how most Indonesian politicians like to represent their political style. </p>
<p>But, in practice, Indonesia is not beyond indulging in unilateralism and non-communication on policy issues. The decision to execute Chan and Sukumaran was obviously unilateral, and Widodo was <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bali-nine-joko-widodo-too-busy-to-talk-to-tony-abbott-about-pair-on-death-row-20150326-1m8cgp">less than communicative</a> with Australia on the issue. And Jakarta’s decision to <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/indonesia-dramatically-cuts-live-cattle-imports-to-only-50000/story-e6frg6nf-1227440856986">cut</a> the live cattle quota was taken unilaterally and with, so far as we can tell, no consultation with Australia. </p>
<p>On balance, it seems that the relationship is more or less back to its usual setting – where “usual setting” means “fragile”.</p>
<p>Peter Varghese, Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, last week <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/07/31/role-business-indonesian-ties">regretted</a> that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We have not yet built the broader constituencies that would give the [Australia-Indonesia] relationship genuine resilience. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Outside government and academic circles, Varghese said, there needed to be stronger business and community links to give the relationship:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… the ballast it needs to cope with momentary political crises or differences in policy. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>True enough. But it has been true for years, at least since 1988 when then-foreign minister Gareth Evans first used the term “ballast” in this context in a speech to a meeting of the Australia Indonesia Business Co-operation Committee in Bali. Evans <a href="http://www.gevans.org/speeches/old/1988/241088_fm_relations_singapore.pdf">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… I look forward to the day when the interests of Australia and Indonesia are so varied and so important that we no longer talk of “the relationship” as though it were a patient of precarious health, sometimes sick, sometimes healthy, but always needing the worried supervision of diplomatic doctors.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Have we moved substantially forward in the relationship since then? Apparently not.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45513/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Colin Brown is a member of the Australia Indonesia Business Council.</span></em></p>On balance, it seems that the Australia-Indonesia relationship is more or less back to its usual setting – where “usual setting” means “fragile”.Colin Brown, Adjunct Professor, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/440432015-06-29T12:13:12Z2015-06-29T12:13:12ZTurnbacks remain an irritant in Australia-Indonesia relations: former foreign minister Natalegawa<p>Former Indonesian foreign minister Marty Natalegawa has called out the Abbott government over its attempt to shrug off any cost to the bilateral relationship caused by the unilateral manner of its boat turnbacks.</p>
<p>But equally, Natalegawa has complicated Labor’s looming policy decision on whether to embrace turnbacks to limit its exposure at the election.</p>
<p>Natalegawa, who served under the very Australia-friendly president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, on Monday participated in the Crawford Australian leadership forum at the Australian National University and appeared on Sky TV.</p>
<p>Natalegawa described bilateral relations as at “a key juncture” and lamented the lack of communication. He said there is a “sense of disconnect” in the relationship at the moment.</p>
<p>There had been low moments before, but there had always been “a sense of communications” which indeed intensified during crisis times, Natalegawa said. “I’m not sure that that kind of communication is going on at the moment, whether public or private.”</p>
<p>While there have been other reasons for recent tensions, notably the executions of the two Australians, Natalegawa made it clear Australia’s policy on turnbacks is a continuing irritant.</p>
<p>The policy “is inherently incompatible with good bilateral relations because it is unilateral”, Natalegawa said.</p>
<p>“The turning back the boat policy, the way it has been executed, has tended to give the impression of shifting the blame, or shifting responsibility, unilaterally on to Indonesia,” Natalegawa said.</p>
<p>Rather, “we need to be sitting down together and have a common solution”.</p>
<p>The problem must be addressed with a co-ordinated and co-operative mindset.
At times either Indonesia or Australia reverted to more unilateral approaches, but regional and national approaches must be in synergy.</p>
<p>It was no use “blaming one another”, Natalegawa said.</p>
<p>“If we go on along this path, whilst the main problem may be resolved, it will be at the expense of bilateral relations.”</p>
<p>Natalegawa said Indonesia as a transit country had every interest in ensuring there was no pull factor from Australia. “We have a common strategic interest.”</p>
<p>Although he did not specifically address it, Natalegawa’s remarks give further substance to the view that Indonesia has been seriously annoyed by Australia’s apparent recent paying of a boat’s crew to take the passengers back. Indonesia has called for explanations from Australia and registered its protest.</p>
<p>When the federal government was feeling the heat over the payment claim, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop hit back, declaring: “the best way for Indonesia to resolve any concerns it has about Operation Sovereign Borders is for Indonesia to enforce sovereignty over its borders. Operation Sovereign Borders is necessary because Indonesian boats with Indonesian crews are leaving Indonesia with the express intention of breaching our sovereignty, facilitated by illegal people-smuggling syndicates.”</p>
<p>Natalegawa picked up on the contrast between the Australia-Indonesia relationship and Tony Abbott’s great warmth towards Singapore, which Abbott has visited over the last couple of days. Abbott on Monday spoke of turning “friendship into something far more akin to a family relationship”.</p>
<p>Natalegawa said it would have been wonderful “if our leaders can be seen to be communicating with one another”. Communication was “terribly important”.</p>
<p>Some of Natalegawa’s comments chimed in with the sentiment expressed by Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs when she said recently: “Boats have got to stop. But have we thought about what the consequences are of pushing people back to our neighbour Indonesia? Is it any wonder that Indonesia will not engage with us on other issues that we care about, like the death penalty?”</p>
<p>Triggs copped a barrage of abuse from ministers and fresh calls for her resignation over her remarks, which they chose to misrepresent. Presumably the government will be more circumspect about Natalegawa’s observations.</p>
<p>Natalegawa’s comments will feed into the difficult debate now underway in Labor, whose hardheads want its present opposition to turnbacks dropped so as to remove a political vulnerability before the election.</p>
<p>Natalegawa’s concerns play to those who use as one argument against turnbacks that they are provocative to the Indonesians. But he also flagged that Indonesia could be more sympathetic to a properly communicated policy – not that he can speak for the present Indonesian government.</p>
<p>If Bill Shorten is going to get a pro-turnback policy through the party – and he’s carefully not ruling that out – it will need to be well wrapped in elaborate guarantees of consultations with the Indonesians, promises of transparency and other assurances, and be accompanied by a very generous humanitarian intake.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://michellegrattan.podbean.com/e/mark-butler-1435488439/?token=9afa27e13f644e35af420e21342f1cfc">Listen to the Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast, with Labor environment spokesman Mark Butler, here or on iTunes.</a></strong></p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/nv27e-56fabb" width="100%" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/44043/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Former Indonesian foreign minister Marty Natalegawa has called out the Abbott government over its attempt to shrug off any cost to the bilateral relationship caused by the unilateral manner of its boat turnbacks.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/199092013-11-07T01:16:53Z2013-11-07T01:16:53ZSpying ‘scandal’: another challenge to the Australia-Indonesia relationship?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/34597/original/5vxq7f5h-1383781056.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Indonesia foreign minister Marty Natalegawa has criticised Australia over allegations of spying, but will it actually adversely reflect our relationship?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Bagus Indahono</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>For anyone interested in Australia-Indonesia relations, nothing so characterises the phenomenon as a car on a roller-coaster. Any rise is followed inevitably by a fall. The ride is never boring, and in a bizarre kind of way it is quite predictable. But sometimes you might hope for a little more stability, a few more moments of calm.</p>
<p>The latest plunge in the relationship has been prompted by revelations that Australia has been <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/snowden-chills-indonesia-relationship/story-e6frfkp9-1226754505321">intercepting electronic communications</a> in Indonesia. The Australian Ambassador to Indonesia, Greg Moriarty, has been <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-01/indonesia-australian-embassy-spying-spies-espionage-jakarta/5062626">called into</a> the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to explain his government’s position. </p>
<p>Indonesian foreign minister Marty Natalegawa <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/indonesia-steps-up-attack-over-spying-20131104-2wx8c.html">has warned</a> that if Australia does not acknowledge what it has done, and promise not to do it again, intelligence co-operation in areas such as people smuggling will be at risk.</p>
<p>All very serious, apparently.</p>
<p>But first a reality check. Natalegawa is a highly experienced former senior diplomat who has represented his country as Ambassador to the UN and to the UK. He has a master’s degree from Cambridge and a PhD from the ANU. His international travel bill would rival that of Kevin Rudd. I would be gobsmacked if he learnt anything new about our intelligence-gathering activities in Indonesia from Edward Snowden’s revelations. </p>
<p>What the revelations have done, though, is to put these allegations into the public arena. And here any political leader must act concerned, must protest their shock and horror, and must demand an end to these activities immediately. Our leaders would do this if it was publicly revealed that the Indonesian embassy in Canberra was tapping Tony Abbott’s mobile phone. In this sense, Natalegawa’s statements follow a predictable script.</p>
<p>In addition, though, Natalegawa is playing to a domestic audience which is highly sensitive to suggestions of foreign meddling in Indonesian affairs. In part, this might be seen in the context of next year’s <a href="http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21584981-parties-search-presidential-candidate-ordinary-indonesians-think-only-jokowi-pictured">parliamentary and presidential elections</a>.</p>
<p>But even without such elections, Natalegawa would be pressed to act. One leading international law scholar, Professor Hikmahanto Juwana of the University of Indonesia, <a href="http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2013/11/06/1139217/Presiden.SBY.Minta.Penyadapan.Tak.Terulang">summed up the situation</a> this way:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If the government does not take a strong and firm stand, the anger of the Indonesian people will be redirected from the US and Australia to the government, and even to President Yudhoyono.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Just as tellingly, Juwana said that if the government’s position ended up being one of “business as usual”, it would look particularly strange, given that even Indonesia’s neighbour Malaysia had taken a strong stand on the issue. To be thought of as less nationalistic and less firm with foreigners than Malaysia is something no self-respecting government of Indonesia would risk.</p>
<p>Yet in an interesting reversal of logic, some elements in Indonesia seem to be quietly pleased by the spying revelations. Nobody spies on countries which are of no significance internationally, or who have no secrets worth knowing. Therefore, the fact that Australia - and more significantly the US - has been spying on Indonesia is proof of the country’s importance.</p>
<p>As one commentator wrote, in an <a href="http://www.antaranews.com/berita/403276/upaya-indonesia-atasi-penyadapan">article</a> carried by the state-run Antara news agency:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Given its geopolitical and geostrategic significance, it is no wonder that Indonesia is the target of bugging by foreign agencies with a variety of interests in Indonesia.</p>
<p>Foreign interests always want to know more about what is happening in Indonesia, and what might happen here.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The same article quoted retired Major-General Glenny Kairupan, a former senior official of the Strategic Intelligence Agency, as saying that Indonesia was naturally the target of bugging by various foreign interests because Indonesia is of such strategic significance.</p>
<p>It is also interesting that as there is still no full-time Indonesian news correspondent based in Australia, the reports of the bugging episode in the Indonesian press are generally sourced from stringers or from foreign news agencies. And in an ironic turn of events, probably the most frequently used foreign news source is the Indonesian language service of the ABC’s <a href="http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/">Radio Australia</a>.</p>
<p>How important is this issue in the broad sweep of Indonesian politics? It has certainly grabbed some headlines – but so have the various Australian parliamentary <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/rorting-rules-unchanged-and-behaviour-much-the-same-20131008-2v6eg.html">travel rorts</a>, which many Indonesians seem to have read about with some relief as showing that their politicians are not the only ones with their hands in the public till. </p>
<p>The renewed discussions about <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/aust-sheep-brutally-slaughtered-in-jordan/story-e6frfku9-1226750086643">live cattle exports</a> has attracted some attention too. Domestically, the issue cannot compete with the news that prominent businessman Ahmad Fathanah, who is associated with the Islamist party PKS, has been <a href="http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/ahmad-fathanah-sentenced-to-14-years-for-graft/">sentenced to 14 years jail</a> for corruptly manipulating quotas of beef imports.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=409&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=514&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=514&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/34598/original/92bdnmc9-1383781467.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=514&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australia’s role in the live cattle trade continues to attract headlines in Indonesia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dave Hunt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Will Jakarta follow up on Natalegawa’s threat to cut intelligence sharing on people smuggling? Not because of this issue – though we need to remember that Australian and Indonesian interests on people smuggling are <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-indonesia-care-about-turning-back-the-boats-15367">not exactly parallel</a>. While the Australian government wants to stop people smugglers bring asylum seekers into the country, the Indonesian government wants to get asylum seekers out of theirs.</p>
<p>But on most other issues on which intelligence is shared - mostly notably terrorism - Jakarta has at least as much to lose as Australia if the sharing were to be halted. Jakarta is not going to cut off its nose to spite its face. So expect a bit more bluster, but no significant, concrete action.</p>
<p>The car on the roller-coaster will soon reach its nadir and start its climb upwards again, back to the status quo.</p>
<p>The more things change…</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/19909/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Colin Brown does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>For anyone interested in Australia-Indonesia relations, nothing so characterises the phenomenon as a car on a roller-coaster. Any rise is followed inevitably by a fall. The ride is never boring, and in…Colin Brown, Adjunct Professor, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.