Indonesia and ASEAN Free Trade Agreement: Nationalist and Regional Integration Strategy (review)

"One of the dangers during a crisis such as this is that people would start implementing protectionist policies … I am pleased that the leaders reaffirmed the principles behind open markets and free trade" said U.S. President George Bush during the G-20 Summit held in Washington, D.C., in the middle of November 2008. The summit aimed to find solutions for the current worsening global crisis. On the other hand, also during the summit, French President Nicolas Sarkozy argued that "laissez-faire capitalism is over".

The debate between globalization and nationalism (protectionism) is not new. Every time an economic crisis occurs, the debate emerges. During the 1997–98 financial crisis, for example, this debate heightened. What is new is that it occurred in the G-20 Summit, among the leaders of twenty largest economies in the world. Particularly, the current crisis is global in nature, rather than regional like in the previous ones.

The book Indonesia and ASEAN Free Trade Agreement does not address the current global crisis. However, it examines the debate between globalization, regionalization, and ethno-nationalism, particularly related to the development in Indonesia after the regional Asian financial crisis in 1997–98.

Alexander C. Chandra, the author of the book, suggested that the world had become both integrated and fragmented at the same time. Global capitalism reminded the leaders of a more internationalized world economy, continuing to widen the search for more profitable ways of production and distribution of goods and services. On the other hand, nationalist economic policies in both developing and developed economies were also active in countering globalization, with the purpose of protecting their own citizens.

Meanwhile, the author argued that regionalism had emerged in response to both the rising trend of globalization and nationalism. Traditionally, nationalism was seen as threatening regionalization and globalization. Nevertheless, the author elaborated that today nationalism was very different from that in the past. Today, nationalism was not necessarily a threat to regionalization and globalization. It could be an important step towards strengthening regionalization and globalization.

He saw regionalism as a mechanism to achieve a new world order, to combat the excess of globalization and minimize the control and abuse by the state, to obtain a better world order, and to improve the regional structure of governance. He also showed the possible symbiotic relationship between nationalism and regionalism, though there were cases where one benefited more than the others and where no group benefited from the symbiosis. Indeed, this symbiotic relationship was the hypothesis that the author examines in this book —that the two could be mutually reinforcing. Regionalism should not been seen as a replacement of nationalism, but it was a means to protect the citizens of interdependent international communities.

To examine his hypothesis, he carried out a case study on Indonesian nationalism and ASEAN regional integration, with a special focus on the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (AFTA). Indonesia was chosen because Chandra saw that Indonesia's development had been shaped with nationalism. ASEAN was selected because of its commitment towards regionalism.

To conduct this study, the author carried out field research in Indonesia from September 2000 to September 2001. He interviewed fifty-two individuals from forty-two institutions to obtain the perception of selected Indonesian state and non-state actors about Indonesia's involvement in ASEAN. He also interviewed individuals from selected foreign embassies in Jakarta and a few individuals from Surabaya. He talked to persons who were familiar with the subject, their role in policy making, the degree of their representativeness in their institution, and their availability for interview.

From the field work, he categorized the respondents into three groups: the maximalists, minimalists, and convergences. The maximalists strongly supported regionalism and globalization. They supported the government policy in using ASEAN as the main pillar in foreign policy. They perceived that the regional autonomy within Indonesia had hampered the process of regionalization.

The minimalists can be seen as extreme nationalists. They resisted globalization and regionalization. They...