Killing the messenger
One
afternoon in Surabaya during the tension leading to the 1999 referendum on the
future of East Timor, our landlord took me to a meeting with the Rukun
Tetangga.
Although
the term means neighborhood harmony, officially the RT is the local community
leader.
“It’s just
a courtesy call to let him know new people have moved in,” our lessor explained
as we walked to the appointment.
“I’ve
already told him you’re a New Zealander.
I don’t think it would be good if people know there’s an Australian in
the kampong.”
The years
roll on but tensions persist. Today Australians registered with the Jakarta
Embassy got an automated e-mail urging a ‘high degree of caution’ because of
possible civil unrest.
This
follows revelations that our government has long spied on its northern neighbor
and supposed friend, impertinently tapping the phones of President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono and his wife, Ibu Ani.
Seasoned
diplomats claim such behavior is commonplace. So do the Australians eavesdrop
US President Barack Obama’s cellphone and intercept intimate messages from his
wife Michelle? Or those of UK Prime
Minister David Cameron and his spouse Samantha?
Should
Edward Snowden, the US whistleblower (or traitor, depending on your viewpoint)
reveal such snooping, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s response might be
more humble than his reactions so far to President SBY’s anger.
In
Parliament Mr Abbott said he wanted to express “my deep and sincere
regret about the embarrassment to the President and to Indonesia that's been
caused by recent media reporting.”
An apology for spying?
Not at all. It’s all the media’s
fault reporting the espionage, so shoot the messenger. In this case it was The
Guardian newspaper and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, the
taxpayer-funded public broadcaster.
Managing director Mark Scott was
forced to defend the decision to publish papers marked TOP SECRET. He told a Senate committee that although he
knew the news was embarrassing to the government, the relevant test was whether
releasing the material was in the public interest. According to news reports Mr Scott ‘drew a distinction between the national interest and the public interest’ – the fine line walked by all journalists.
While others were handling the controversy with tweezers,
journalist and academic Dr Philip Dorling (a visiting fellow at the Australian
Defence Force Academy) grasped the issue firmly:
‘Why do we do it?’ he wrote. ‘Behind all the declarations of
friendship and good neighborliness by successive Australian governments,
Canberra just doesn't trust Jakarta. We work closely with Indonesia, including
in the fields of security and intelligence, but we don't trust them. We never
have, and probably never will.’
His comments are well grounded. A 2012 Department of Foreign
Affairs and Trade survey of Australians’ attitudes showed knowledge of
Indonesia to be poor and perceptions mixed.
Almost half the respondents rated Indonesia ‘a threat to Australian
national security’.
Scrutiny of the results show the distrust was rooted last
century when Indonesian paramilitaries, allegedly sponsored by the army, laid
East Timor waste after the referendum rejected Indonesian rule.
Since then the Bali and Jakarta bombs have fertilized the
distrust. Hundreds of thousands fly
into Kuta every year, but few venture into Java, a land of mystery and Islam,
regretfully still considered a synonym for terrorism.
More recently the Indonesian government’s inability (or
reluctance) to stop its own citizens using Indonesian-flagged boats to ferry
asylum seekers to Australia is a toxin that poisons attitudes.
Few Indonesians understand how the bombings continue to
resonate in Australia, just as Australians don’t appreciate the sensitivity of
Indonesians towards real or imagined colonial attitudes. It takes more than 68 years of hard-won
independence to wash away three centuries of rule by smug white-skinned
foreigners.
Mr Abbott and his ministerial colleagues may profess undying love for Indonesia (the President is “a very good friend… one of the very best friends”), but they’re occasional suitors living far away in Canberra, making only fleeting visits and not recipients of today’s travel warnings.
If this is how Australia treats best friends, thank goodness we’re not
enemies.
The
thousands of low-profile Australians who work and live in Indonesia, quietly
trying to eradicate misunderstandings and put substance into the leaders’
rhetoric, now have to cope with the fallout.
Military
cooperation has already been ditched. Other agreements, treaties and projects
like the splendid BRIDGE student exchange programs may survive, but they’ll be
considered suspect.
The AUD
$542 million (Rp 5.8 billion) aid program has benefited thousands, particularly
schoolchildren in remote areas, but all that goodwill is rapidly evaporating.
Political
scientists yawningly note that all nations spy on each other and this is widely
known. International relations are
always a roller-coaster ride – so what’s new?
Known by
insiders, maybe, but not the general population. We may have wondered, but we didn’t know for certain.
What’s new
is that doubts have hardened into fact. The suspicious can no longer be
dismissed as crazed conspiracy theorists.
Inevitably
some superficial relationship will return as time heals. We can betray and threaten and fear, but
nothing is going to change one unshakeable fact. Our countries are – and will always be – close neighbors.
We have to
learn to live in harmony – we’re in the same kampong. It’s time for some Rukun Tetangga.
(First published in The Jakarta Post, 23 November 2013)