Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Playing up populist nationalism still one of Indonesia’s favourite tricks

The recent public furore in Indonesia over an assumption that Singapore had somehow appropriated the Pulau Manis island chain near Batam is enough evidence that relations between the two neighbouring nations can be fickle.

Nationalism in Indonesia is still fuelled by a siege mentality, first cultivated by the political elites under the country’s first President Sukarno. Photo: Reuters

Nationalism in Indonesia is still fuelled by a siege mentality, first cultivated by the political elites under the country’s first President Sukarno. Photo: Reuters

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp

The recent public furore in Indonesia over an assumption that Singapore had somehow appropriated the Pulau Manis island chain near Batam is enough evidence that relations between the two neighbouring nations can be fickle.

The incident started when the developer of the Funtasy Island eco-park resort on the islands released an online map on which Pulau Manis is tinted the same shade of blue as Singapore, provoking a knee-jerk reaction by Indonesian netizens and politicians who misinterpreted it as a claim for territory.

While Indonesian nationalists may argue that the cartographical offence is similar to China’s Nine Dash Line in the South China Sea — which incorporates part of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Indonesia’s Natuna Island — it is worth bearing in mind that the Funtasy Island map appeared on the website of a private consortium. Following the outcry, the developer amended the map accordingly, suggesting that it had been a genuine error.

The Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs also upheld Indonesia’s sovereignty over the islands without reservation.

By contrast, the Nine Dash Line made its public debut on Chinese passports issued by the Chinese government in 2012. Even after protests by several Asian countries, it has not been retracted. Beijing’s stance on the inclusion of part of the Natuna Sea in its Nine Dash Line is also ambiguous. China has maintained that it does not dispute Indonesia’s sovereignty over Natuna Island, but no such reassurance has been made regarding its surrounding waters.

Populist nationalism remains an unquantifiable variable in Indonesia-Singapore relations, more so now than ever since the fall of President Suharto. It was particularly apparent in the 2007 rejection by the Indonesian House of Representatives of the Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) between the two governments.

The predominant populist sentiment at the time was that Singapore had tried to compromise Indonesia’s sovereignty by asking for access to military training grounds on Sumatra.

A poll in June 2007 by Indonesian current affairs magazine TEMPO found that almost 70 per cent of its respondents saw the DCA benefiting Singapore only, at Indonesia’s expense.

The view may have been the result of the failure of the Indonesian press in highlighting the potential benefits the agreement could bring: Modernisation and upgrades for the Indonesian military, greater economic activities in the areas where the restored military training facilities were based, not to mention the infrastructure that would go to Indonesia if the agreement were to be terminated in the future.

Obviously rattled by the public opposition to the DCA — abetted by patriotic lip service by various politicians wishing to capitalise on the issue — the Indonesian government under President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono buckled and gave way to popular sentiment.

To make matters worse, the DCA had been negotiated as a package alongside the Extradition Treaty (ET), aimed at allowing Indonesians indicted of graft residing in Singapore to be repatriated with their assets.

With the DCA shelved by the Indonesian parliament, the ET between the two countries is now effectively in limbo. The then Indonesian Defence Minister Juwono Sudarsono even alleged that Singapore, through subterfuge, had sabotaged both the DCA and the ET.

Whenever the issue of the ET with Singapore is resurrected in public debate, Indonesian officials conveniently omit the fact that the deal is on hold because Indonesia has so far failed to ratify the DCA.

The latest example of this selective amnesia came in April this year when Vice-President Jusuf Kalla bemoaned Singapore’s “non-cooperation” with regard to the ET. Even as a ruse to force Singapore’s hand to ratify the ET without the DCA, it reeked of dishonourable conduct.

What the Indonesian public fails to appreciate is that the 2007 DCA was unlikely to have been subterfuge to erode Indonesia’s sovereignty.

The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) has always been in need of larger training grounds, given the lack of space in the city-state. The SAF, for example, under an arrangement with its Australian counterpart, has had access to the Shoalwater Bay training facility in Queensland, which is three times the size of Singapore.

Its air force personnel have also been permitted to use Western Australian airspace for training purposes.

SIEGE MENTALITY

On the other hand, sovereignty, at least in its superficial and symbolic sense, is almost sacrosanct in the Indonesian psyche.

The raising of the Indonesian flag above the tallest building on Pulau Manis by the military following the Funtasy Island map erratum falls under this category.

However, sovereignty clearly did not enter the equation when Indonesian officials decided to use a foreign Internet server to store all the personal information on its citizens gathered under the Electronic Identity Card scheme.

Nationalism in Indonesia is still fuelled by a siege mentality, first cultivated by the political elites under the country’s first President, Sukarno. It is built upon the belief that foreign countries covet the nation’s riches.

Indonesia’s closest neighbours, Malaysia, Singapore and Australia, inevitably bear the brunt of being the most convenient culprits.

In Singapore’s case, it is bad enough other countries covet Indonesia’s riches, but even worse for Singapore — seen as a small nation — to do so.

The tale of the scheming neighbours versus their prey, the good-natured but gullible Indonesians, is regrettably part of the Indonesian national myth.

It is something that the Indonesian political elites now and again exploit to conjure up a common enemy, a useful exercise in diverting the public from real issues that matter, such as the economy.

It is, without doubt, an old trick in Indonesian politics.

In the past, Sukarno waged his Konfrontasi campaign in the 1960s against Malaysia and Singapore partly to take the people’s minds off the crippling economic woes under his leadership.

Now, as Indonesia struggles with the global economic downturn, the occasional temptation to use this old trick may be too great for the potentates in Jakarta to resist.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Johannes Nugroho is a writer and businessman from Surabaya.

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.