Donald K. Emmerson discusses possible reasons for Indonesia’s resistance to disaster relief aid
On Monday, an undersea earthquake shook Indonesia's remote Mentawai Islands and triggered a 10-foot tsunami: It has killed at least 272 people, and left 412 missing. The first cargo plane with humanitarian supplies arrived today. Hundreds of miles away in eastern Java, the volcanic Mount Merapi erupted Tuesday and killed at least 30 people.
That's two disasters in less than 24 hours.
Indonesia is no stranger to catastrophe. It is located along the Pacific Ring of Fire, which is one of the most seismically and volcanically volatile areas in the world. Its last sizeable earthquake and tsunami duo struck in December of 2004, killing more than 225,000 people in 14 countries.
But despite the death and destruction of the last 48 hours, Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said today that he doesn't yet see a need for foreign aid or rescue assistance.
So far, only the Philippines and the United States have offered to help Indonesia. But Natalegawa's behavior seems counter-intuitive. In the face of disaster, why would any country preemptively say no to aid?
A look into Indonesia's history reveals latent political sensitivities that may have influenced Natalegawa's decision. Indonesia's first president, Sukarno, was a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement, an organization of countries who are not aligned with or against any major world power.
Indonesia prides itself on its "independent and active" foreign policy, which was first developed by then Vice President Mohammad Hatta on September 2, 1948 in Central Java. "Do we, Indonesians, in the struggle for the freedom of our people and our country, only have to choose between Russia and America?" he asked. "Is not there any other stand that we can take in the pursuit of our ideals?"
The "other stand" became known as "mendayung antara dua karang" or "rowing between two reefs."
Indonesia doesn't want to appear incompetent, or weak, to outside governments, and may also be wary to accept aid for fear of undermining its national legitimacy.
In 2004, Indonesia's acceptance of aid had an arguably negative effect on its citizens. "Though the post-tsunami reconstruction efforts in Aceh were generally successful, the amount of aid did engender some resentment in Jakarta over whether the national government had lost control of the reconstruction, and also potentially altered the economy in Aceh," explains Josh Kurlantzick a fellow for southeast Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. "So people remember that."
Donald Emmerson, the director of the Southeast Asia Forum at Stanford University's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, cites several reasons for Natalegawa's response. First, he says, if the Indonesian government solicited foreign aid, it would be inundated with offers. Coordinating offers of assistance right now would be a severe burden on the government.
Then there's the question of scale: so far, the destruction seems manageable in comparison to the 2004 disaster. Still, it's unclear whether Indonesia will be able to adequately respond on its own. "Indonesia is a large country, and its infrastructure is overstretched," Emmerson says. "Its capacity to respond effectively to domestic disasters is not as good as it might be."
Fractured Rebellion by Andrew G. Walder featured in New York Review of Books
Principle, Pragmatism or Prostitution? Speaking Human Rights to Global Finance
Professor David Kinley holds the Chair in Human Rights Law at University of Sydney, and is the Law Faculty's Associate-Dean (International). He is also an Academic Panel member of Doughty Street Chambers in London, the UK's leading human rights practice. He has previously held positions at Cambridge University, The Australian National University, the University of New South Wales, Washington College of Law, American University, and was the founding Director of the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law at Monash University (2000-2005). He was a Senior Fulbright Scholar in 2004, based in Washington DC, and Herbert Smith Visiting Fellow at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge in 2008. He is author and editor of eight books and more than 80 articles, book chapters, reports and papers.
He has worked for 15 years as a consultant and adviser on international and domestic human rights law in Vietnam, Indonesia, South Africa, Thailand, Iraq, Nepal, Laos, China, and Myanmar/Burma, and for such organizations as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the World Bank, the Ford Foundation, AusAID, and the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, and a number of transnational corporations, and NGOs. He has also previously worked for three years with the Australian Law Reform Commission and two years with the Australian Human Rights Commission.
His latest publications include the critically acclaimed Civilising Globalisation: Human Rights and the Global Economy (CUP, 2009), Corporations and Human Rights (Ashgate 2009), and The World Trade Organisation and Human Rights: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Edward Elgar, 2009) Another edited collection entitled Principled Engagement: Promoting Human Rights in Pariah States will be published by UNU Publications in 2011. He is currently working on another book investigating the interrelations between human rights and global finance.
David was born in Belfast, Northern Ireland and brought up there during the 1960s and 70s. He studied in England in the 1980s at Sheffield Hallam University and the Universities of Sheffield and Cambridge, and after obtaining his doctorate from the latter in 1990 he moved to Australia. He now lives in Sydney with his wife and three children.
Encina Ground Floor Conference Room
The Twilight of the Bombs
Richard Rhodes is the author or editor of twenty-three books including The Making of the Atomic Bomb, which won a Pulitzer Prize in Nonfiction, a National Book Award and a National Book Critics Circle Award; Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb, which was shortlisted for a Pulitzer Prize in History; an investigation of the roots of private violence, Why They Kill; a personal memoir, A Hole in the World; a biography, John James Audubon; and four novels. He has received numerous fellowships for research and writing, including grants from the Ford Foundation, the Guggenheim Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation Program in International Peace and Security and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. He has been a visiting scholar at Harvard and MIT and a host and correspondent for documentaries on public television's Frontline and American Experience series.
He is an affiliate of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University. A third volume of nuclear history, Arsenals of Folly: The Making of the Nuclear Arms Race, was published in October 2007 by Alfred A. Knopf. It examines the international politics of nuclear weapons thoughout the Cold War. A fourth and final volume, The Twilight of the Bomb, is currently in bookstores. Rhodes lectures frequently to audiences in the United States and abroad (see Lecturing tab, above). With his wife Ginger Rhodes, a clinical psychologist in private practice in San Francisco, he lives near Half Moon Bay, California.
Reuben W. Hills Conference Room
Dialogue, diplomacy urged to resolve North Korea issues
The world first became concerned about North Korea's nuclear development program in 1989 through satellite photos of a facility under construction near the town of Yongbyon. Since then, there have been on-again, off-again negotiations with North Korea by the United States, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and other countries in the region to halt and dismantle North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
A consistent strategy focused on dialogue and diplomacy is essential to get out of the current quagmire, urged Song Min-soon, a member of the Korean National Assembly and a former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, at a Korean Studies Program public seminar on October 18. Although the United States and the ROK must lead efforts, China's active involvement is also crucial. Resolving the nuclear issue is necessary to help ensure the long-term peace and prosperity of not only the Korean Peninsula but also the entire East Asia region.
Song explored reasons why
previous negotiation attempts failed, especially the lack of a shared vision
among the concerned countries for the future of the peninsula and region. He
suggested that this rendered China less willing to play a stronger role in the
negotiations. The imbalance of power among the negotiating countries is another
significant factor. North Korea's only effective bargaining card is its nuclear
weapons program, argued Song, while countries like the United States have the
capability to offer or withhold important aid, such as energy and development assistance.
Song advocated a firm, direct approach, stating that the United States has not adopted
a real strategy for effecting nuclear disarmament. Instead, it has opted for the
"slogan" of "strategic patience." He cautioned against taking a hard line, such
as the current ROK administration is pursuing. Song expressed the hope that the
United States would focus more on developing a well-planned diplomatic strategy
for resolving the nuclear issue and that the ROK would adopt a more
conciliatory approach toward North Korea.
To move forward in the Six-Party Talks-negotiations among the United States,
the ROK, North Korea, China, the Russian Federation, and Japan-and effectively resolve
the North Korea nuclear issue, Song made several recommendations. He pointed to
the long-term benefit of building trust incrementally by fulfilling small,
strategic commitments to North Korea. To balance the asymmetry of negotiating
cards, Song suggested that the other countries proceed with fulfilling their
commitments and allow North Korea more time to fulfill its own obligations.
Bringing China fully on board by building a logical basis for its involvement
is also a crucial element of the negotiations, he offered. Finally, Song
asserted that the United States, the ROK, and China must develop a shared,
solid vision for peaceful coexistence on the peninsula, taking into account different
scenarios and the roles each country should play.
Song expressed confidence that the approach he outlined would not only eventually resolve the nuclear issue but would also open the way for stability and prosperity for everyone in East Asia, including North Korea.