How did we, as a nation, respond to a draft resolution at the UN Security Council last week, urging Burma to democratize and respect human rights? Well, we were not sure about the relevance and usefulness of such a resolution, so we opted to abstain. We did not go for "yes" or "against", the other two options available to us as a non-permanent member of the Security Council.
Does that mean we have no opinion about the matter? Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda explained that abstaining was not the same as having no opinion. Indonesia, said Ambassador Reslan Jenie, the head of the Indonesian Mission to the UN, did not object to the substance of the proposed draft resolution.
In fact, Indonesia agreed that problems in Burma "inflict suffering on the people of Myanmar and create problems for immediate neighbors." Indonesia also said that "Myanmar must respond to the imperative of restoring democracy and respect for human rights -- that is a matter of principle."
What Indonesia objected to was the reason and procedure by which the draft resolution was brought to the Security Council. We don't see the problem of Burma as a threat to international security. If it is not a threat to international security, than the issue does not fall within the mandate of the Security Council. If so, why then should we say "yes" to such a resolution? We, instead, were of the opinion that it would be better if the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the regional organization to which Burma belongs, were given a chance to resolve the problem.
Fair enough. So far so good. However, the reality is not that simple. First, Burma has not responded positively to any ASEAN initiative. Burma has never been enthusiastic about ASEAN's goodwill. Worse, no one can be sure whether Burma attaches great importance to ASEAN, let alone to Indonesia. In fact, Burma does not seem to care much about the outcome of the voting at the Security Council. So, if Myanmar has in the past not responded positively to ASEAN, is there any reason to believe that from now on it will?
The question is really: Does ASEAN matter to Burma? Of course it does, but not in the way we want it to. Burma needs ASEAN to defend it. Despite some grudges from some fellow ASEAN members, Burma understands that ASEAN at the end will always come to its side. The recent ASEAN Summit in Cebu and previous summits demonstrate that well. ASEAN leaders cannot agree on what to do about the problem of Burma. In short, there is no "ASEAN Burma Strategy."
Second, the proposed draft resolution was not merely about Burma. It was also about us. Like it or not, in the eyes of the international community, our response to the draft resolution on Burma will serve as an indicator of the extent to which the new domestic norms -- democracy and human rights -- enter our foreign policy considerations.
Unfortunately, our record on this front is mixed. On the one hand, Indonesia has pledged to uphold democracy and human rights. In fact, Minister Wirayuda has often said that democracy -- together with our image as a moderate Muslim country -- is "an asset for our foreign policy." In January 2005, he maintained that "we have to reflect democracy into our region. That is why we are active in promoting democracy in ASEAN." Indeed, it is Indonesia who has since 2003 insisted that ASEAN needs to transform itself into a democratic entity.
However, there is a limit to the extent we can translate such declaratory intent into policies. We do not have the leverage to support democracy abroad. We are also not in the position to criticize electoral manipulation in other countries. We have not condemned the entrenched dictatorship in Burma or the military coup such as in Thailand. We have not, and can not, put the promotion of democracy and human rights at the top of the foreign policy agenda.
Indeed, despite the commitment and intentions of the Foreign Ministry to project democratic values beyond our borders, such aspirations remain elusive due to the state of the internal democratization process. In order for foreign policy to fully unleash its potential, it is imperative that Indonesia prove its democracy works well at home. And that task is not the responsibility of the Foreign Ministry alone. It is the obligation of all Indonesians. It requires genuine commitment from political leaders.
So, let us give the government the benefit of the doubt. To demonstrate that we are truly committed to democracy, we should from now on take the lead and play a more active role in resolving the Burma problem. That would require a plan, a strategy, resource, and sustained political commitment. Unfortunately, in this country we need to look hard to find these ingredients.
The writer is deputy executive director of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.