-
14. Strategic Centrality: Indonesia's Changing Role in ASEAN
- ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute
- Chapter
- Additional Information
66 Anthony L. Smith By: ROS Size: 7.5" x 10.25" J/No: 03-14474 Fonts: New Baskerville 14. STRATEGIC CENTRALITY Indonesia’s Changing Role in ASEAN ANTHONY L. SMITH SOFT AUTHORITARIAN ROLE MODEL Indonesia’s future domestic political configuration will have another effect on ASEAN. The Asian financial crisis has revealed a good deal of governmentbusiness collusion and this has undermined the theory of “authoritarian advantage” whereby non-democratic governments have greater power to mobilize resources. The obvious counter point to the “authoritarian advantage” thesis is that authoritarian governments contain no checks and balances on high level corruption. Jusuf Wanandi has argued that the “Korean Model”, which involved strong central government direction of economic development , has resulted in economic stagnation in the case of the Philippines and Indonesia.1 Indonesia’s experiment with soft authoritarianism under Soeharto’s New Order has ultimately been the cause of regional instability with uncertainty now hanging over Indonesia’s future. The political and economic crisis has meant an end to the role that Indonesia played as mentor to a number of other Asian states. In the past, Indonesia was a soft authoritarian role model for Myanmar and Vietnam, which sought to engage in market reforms without political change, but this is no longer the case. Furthermore, not only has Indonesia’s current circumstances lost “prestige” for the New Order, but the new leaders may have differing political perspectives to Soeharto. While it is far too early to pronounce Indonesia as a fully fledged liberal democracy , the transitional Habibie administration shifted Indonesia further away from the soft authoritarian camp. There were, however, mixed expressions from the ASEAN member-states. The Thai Foreign Minister, Surin Pitsuwan, has stated, “The elections are a good development for Indonesia and the entire region.”2 But Thailand’s open enthusiasm for Indonesia’s June elections was in contrast to the silence or reservations of other members. Malaysia’s Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohammad, has expressed some doubts about what it means Excerpted from Anthony L. Smith, Strategic Centrality: Indonesia’s Changing Role in ASEAN (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2000), by permission of the author and the publisher. 014 AR Ch 14 22/9/03, 12:40 PM 66 Strategic Centrality: Indonesia’s Changing Role in ASEAN 67 By: ROS Size: 7.5" x 10.25" J/No: 03-14474 Fonts: New Baskerville for Indonesia: “Democratic elections at the best of times are very destabilizing. It is even more destabilizing when it is conducted at a time when there is economic and political turmoil.”3 One possible future scenario pits Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand against the other countries that do not espouse liberal democracy and ultimately a polarization of ASEAN into two ideological camps. Habibie took the “flexible engagement” idea firmly on board — much to the annoyance of some other members (perhaps he went further then the Thais imagined). The current Indonesian ruling élite support the further integration of ASEAN and the incorporation of “human security” into the ASEAN framework. Indonesia, under Wahid, once it has regained its international confidence, may well begin to support the creation of a more integrated ASEAN. Wahid’s predecessor , Habibie, did, on occasion, call for a common currency and an ASEAN Parliament along the lines of the European Parliament4 — the latter strikes at the heart of “non-interference” as a parliament by its very nature would have to make comment on a host of issues. While both suggestions are far from feasible projects, they do point to a willingness to consider greater functionalism within ASEAN. A number of Indonesian officials consider that in the future Indonesia will push for more institutionalization of ASEAN. This marks a real seachange in Indonesia’s future role. Under Soeharto, positive integration measures were stymied and held up. Habibie and Wahid have demonstrated that they wish to see a policy shift, illustratively the new interest in AFTA and AFTA-plus. However, with Indonesia’s reduced capacity this change still resides at the level of rhetoric and so far lacks real substance. ASEAN stands in the valley of decision between a status quo grouping where sovereignty rests with the governments of member states and a more ambitious grouping that promotes social and economic integration from an active secretariat. Clearly ASEAN is not ready for the second path, and Indonesia is in no position to support such an alteration. THE GROWTH OF INSTITUTIONS AND CIVIL SOCIETY The increasing concentration of power in the hands of the political executive...