Indo-Pacific danger
A high-level dialogue for Indo-Pacific cooperation with ministerial-level delegates from 18 countries was held in Jakarta last week.
The dialogue touched on responses to global challenges felt in the region. The Indonesian delegation underlined the need for inclusive dialogue as a concrete step in tackling the complexity and sensitivity of issues currently faced in the region. Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne wrote in Kompas (20/3/2019) that she was happy to be united in a shared commitment in the spirit of friendship and mutual understanding.
She praised Indonesia by linking its statement with the shooting incident in Christchurch to emphasize how Australia had no intention of disrupting diversity and tolerance in the region. Is that right?
US as the axis
International politics is currently changing rapidly. Its acceleration is mainly driven by the US, which is the strongest economic and political power at present. Domestic US politics require Trump to swiftly (within four years) realize the promises he has made, and, most importantly, there must be an impact that can immediately be felt, especially in economic growth, employment and investment. Trump\'s policies have changed international political relations from multilateral to bilateral cooperation. This also changes the interactions and negotiations of countries from cooperation promoting common values and mutual consensus to a race that prioritizes competition.
For the US, all countries are competitors unless they yield to its authority. The US translates this stance into a policy of providing incentives and disincentives. Those that side with the US will get incentives such as those obtained by Mexico and Canada in the USMCA (US-Mexico-Canada-Agreement), and those that oppose it will get sanctions in the form of tariffs, such as China. The US Department of Commerce has started 122 antidumping investigations (countervailing duties). China ranks first, followed by Japan, Germany, Mexico, Ireland, Vietnam, Italy, South Korea, Malaysia, India, Thailand, France, Switzerland and Taiwan. Indonesia ranks 15th.
Contestation of Indo-Pacific concept
One of the mechanisms to divide rival and allied countries is the Indo-Pacific concept. We need to read and interpret this concept in the current context, because the US and its allies have also reinterpreted the concept according to their current interests. According to my observation, Trump rarely makes new
policies. He uses old policy loopholes created by previous presidents (Democrats and Republicans) to advance US interests. This is done to have a legitimate basis and thereby avoid criticism from Congress or the public.
Payne\'s statement illustrates her excitement about Indonesia (finally) being open for and even considering supporting the Indo-Pacific concept pushed by the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue), namely the regional military and political security cooperation group led by Australia, the US, Japan and India. Australia is the US’ right hand in our region. Just as Australia continues to actively lobby India to more effectively face China – even promising India various infrastructure and energy assistance programs – Australia is also actively persuading Indonesia.
Indonesia has actually sniffed out US intentions pursued since 2002 through Japan and the East Asia Summit (EAS) forum, which voiced the importance of involving India and Australia in the EAS. At that time, the ASEAN countries were divided in responding, but Indonesia chose to find middle ground and sought confirmation that ASEAN was allowed to play a central role in maintaining regional security and stability. In its development, the Indo-Pacific discourse was briefly relaxed, because the domestic politics of India, Australia and Japan required their governments to focus on domestic affairs and distance themselves from the United States. At that time, our sensitivity to their continued moves weakened.
It turned out that the US and Australia were consistently looking for ways to counteract, even hit, China. In 2007, the Quad dialog was opened again with the conviction that there were now more reasons to contain China. Japan faced China on Senkaku Island; India felt unheard by Beijing with regard to its big trade deficit with China, the Australian leadership shifted from the Labor Party to the anti-Chinese Conservative Party. The concept offered by the US was the Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP). The host of their meeting was Singapore, which had invited the Quad to meet on the sidelines of the ASEAN Regional Forum in the Philippines. Since then, the Indo-Pacific security concept has been contested again, and ASEAN (as well as Indonesia) are urged to act.
The term Indo-Pacific refers the countries located between the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, a fast-developing region. Asia is located right in the middle of the two oceans. The US calls the four countries "Axis of Democracy" and "Zamrud (diamond) Security" to counteract China\'s power. The US intention is to wrap its regional security concept in a framework of democracy (even human rights), as seen in the statement of US Vice President Mike Pence, who at the APEC meeting in Port Moresby 2018 said the Indo-Pacific offered the concept of a "free and open" area, free from state pressure of other countries, respecting individual freedom, religious freedom, good governance, upholding the values of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, having free sea and air areas, and free and transparent investment with protection of intellectual property rights and profitable trade.
The FOIP concept was announced through the Halifax International Security Forum, which in November 2018 confirmed the position of the US and its allies on the Quad to move together in the name of democracy. Interestingly, the invitation to speak there was limited, and from the US side the one who
was present was not a civilian but a military officer, namely the head of the US Indo-Pacific command, who in his speech repeated Mike Pence\'s statement.
Indonesia has seen that there is still a chance that, if ASEAN is in the middle of the Indo-Pacific and takes an active role, the US-style Indo-Pacific concept called FOIP can be deflected into the concept of Indo-Pacific cooperation ASEAN style. The following is proof that Indonesia\'s view is naive.
First, ASEAN has never had one voice in responding to the FOIP, but that is not what is heard by the Quad, because Singapore is actively convincing the Quad that ASEAN is behind the Quad. Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in March 2018 (The Jakarta Post, 2/4/2018), as soon as US combat ships passed within 12 nautical miles from a Chinese-made island in the Mischief Reef said, "most ASEAN members support and welcome US positions", and he named the US a force in the Pacific. He further said that the US presence was reliable and constructive. Singapore also actively hosted Quad meetings and did not hesitate to insert a Quad meeting in the EAS package, so that when Singapore became the chair of ASEAN in 2007 and 2018, it allowed Quad countries to conduct sideline meetings at the ASEAN Summit week. The heads of ASEAN countries were conditioned to meet with leaders of the Quad countries.
After the 2018 ASEAN Summit, the Quad agreed to "add teeth" to its policies, and the target was China. This meant there was something that increased the Quad\'s confidence after the ASEAN meeting. Of course, we should also not forget that Singapore provides a US military basis.
Second, the Indo-Pacific concept offered by Indonesia through ASEAN, which is based on the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC), has thus been neglected. See the statements of the ASEAN chair in 2013 and 2014, none of which guarantee ASEAN\'s position in the Indo-Pacific. Instead, Singapore as the chair issued informal statements as if the FOIP concept had been approved by ASEAN.
Third, Australia, which has repeatedly participated in side meetings with ASEAN, has said that the Quad was separate from the Indo-Pacific discussed in ASEAN, but it has never rejected the FOIP. Australia has even strengthened its interests with the US by increasing investment in defense security equipment, including weapons, submarines and sea patrols. India has never explained how it comprehends the concept of the TAC in the Indo-Pacific, as is evident from the fact that India urged Indonesia and Malaysia to conduct joint patrols in the Malacca Strait, as if Indonesia and Malaysia were already part of FOIP security cooperation.
Inconsistency
China is the main target in the cross hairs of the Indo-Pacific concept. The US and its allies are pursuing various ways to erode China\'s sources of income and ensure China has greater economic dependence on the US. They are happy that some developing countries have begun to shun the Belt and Road initiative.
The Indonesian perspective must change. We cannot conduct relations with other countries within a framework of loose cooperation that supposes all or most countries are seeking constructive relations. There is a deficit of mutual trust. The countries around us are moving closer to those that are considered able to guarantee security and political stability and prosperity, even if there is an open confrontation. In this situation, Indonesia does not have a convincing offer, because our mindset is still about negotiating at the table.
The President of the Republic of Indonesia for the 2019-2024 period must be vigilant in view of the concept of democracy in the region that continues to be echoed by the Quad, because the countries involved cannot be said to be consistently promoting democracy or living up to human rights principles. Singapore, which is always invited by the Quad, for example, can hardly be said to always care about democracy and human rights. As Indonesia pushed for a human rights approach in handling Myanmar, Singapore was even the one that actively rejected any dialogue regarding Myanmar and the Rohingya, let alone those related to the findings of the UN Independent Fact Finding Team. Singapore in its leadership succeeded in deflecting ASEAN dialogue on the addition of a mandate to the AHA ASEAN Humanitarian Aid Center, so that cooperation for Myanmar, even if it later materialized, was limited to humanitarian assistance.
We have seen what happened in Venezuela, Yemen, Iran. There is no such thing as common sense when the US decides to change the political order in a region. When US allies agree to strengthen security cooperation with it, at that moment they are just awaiting orders from the US. Sweet words are no guarantee that Indonesia is safe from potential infiltration of US interest groups that want to hit China through prolonged tension in the ASEAN region and Asia-Pacific. With the current leadership of Thailand, there will almost certainly be no innovative ASEAN activities in the fields of democracy and human rights. In 2020, 2021 and 2022 when Vietnam, Brunei Darussalam and Cambodia become the leaders, the direction could be anticipated as well. This means that our region is generally not seen as democratic, making it an easy target to look for reasons that could even lead to bloodshed. This is called a proxy war. Hopefully, Indonesia moves to minimize that risk.
Dinna Wisnu, Practitioner and lecturer of International Relations at Bina Nusantara University