By Peter Nevile
Megaphone
diplomacy is not the answer to the asylum seeker issue. Any solution which involves either turning
back the boats or towing them back to Indonesia is doomed to failure.
Indonesia is
no more at fault than Australia for the “Boat People” problem. There is also significant doubt that the
problem is a pull issue relating to government policy. It may simply be a push issue as a result of
increasing unrest in the source countries and Australia being one of the
cheapest options. The present blame game
adds little to finding a solution.
Any solution
requires cooperation and consensus between Indonesia and Australia and
preferably the cooperation of the countries that are the source of the “asylum
seekers”.
There appears to be support from
Indonesia to at least consider a solution based on these imperatives.
The new policy directive issued by the
reborn Rudd government appears to be simply tinkering around the edges. It is not hard to imagine the general public
having some sympathy for the view that those asylum seekers who have
deliberately destroyed their identity, should be sent to the back of
queue. Those measures however, do not
address the fundamental problem of the increasing numbers of asylum seekers and
the increasing pressure placed upon the Department of Immigration. There are of course other issues: - The
present detention centres. Asylum
seekers released into the community with no work rights, dependent on
charity. Children in custody. The increasing costs associated with the
present policy.
If we accept that the problem must be
addressed jointly, there are a number of factors which must be understood. The Indonesian psyche differs quite markedly
from the Australian psyche. While there
are many differences, two stand out on this particular issue. Indonesians (and
I use that term collectively) are by nature and perhaps culture very much
directed by “rasa” or feelings. While in
the West we might make a decision on logical premises, frequently those logical
premises are overridden in Indonesia by feelings. By feelings I do not simply mean random
emotional feelings but a more deep seated feeling taking into account culture,
religion, history and a very personal view of their position now within the
world, including an historical view.
The historical perspective is probably
best understood by a total distrust of anything that smacks of a patronising or
a “colonialist” attitude. For these
reasons alone, megaphone diplomacy is doomed to failure.
Perhaps an understanding of the
geographical nature of Indonesia would also help explain why there is little
point in trying to cast blame upon Indonesia.
The physical geography makes it an extremely porous transit point.
It is true that the problem may be
exacerbated by the Indonesian visa free system for fellow Muslims, as it is
largely from those countries that large numbers of asylum seekers
originate. However, for the reasons
above, it must be a very sensitive discussion.
A map would indicate that Indonesia is a
country of some 17,000 islands or thereabouts and many of them particularly in
the Eastern provinces are sparsely populated.
Communications and effective control by authorities is tenuous and
thinly spread. There are literally
thousands of miles of coast line. There
are hundreds of small fishing villages, all having, or capable of making boats,
similar to those often seen wallowing precariously in the seas on route to
Christmas Island or other parts of Australia.
In many cases desperate and poverty ridden local fisherman, who are
unlikely to select the best boats available, effectively risk their lives in
the hope that their families and children will be in a position to receive a
better education and life. A very basic but
strong motivation.
These issues perhaps point to a partial
solution. This aspect was discussed by
Ross Taylor a previous State Chairman of the Australian and Indonesia Business
Council and now president of the Australia Indonesia Association based in
Western Australia. He wrote an article in The Western Australian
newspaper last year in which he suggested that one possible solution worth
investigating was for the Australian government to understand the issues with
the Eastern province of Indonesia being a major departure point for the asylum
seekers.
As we are all painfully aware, the
Australian government presently spends a great deal of money dealing with
asylum seekers in Christmas Island, Nauru and elsewhere in detention centres
based in Australia. They are presently
conducting talks with the Papua New Guinea Government
Ross’s article goes on to suggest and I
agree wholeheartedly, that much of that money would be far better spent in
providing financial assistance for the construction of detention centres in
those very areas in the Eastern province of Indonesia, that are the launching
places for “the boats”. They could be
constructed using Australian financial and technical assistance.
The centres could be administered
cooperatively by Indonesian staff and Australian personnel. This would have immediate benefits. Construction in Indonesia is considerably
cheaper than Australia. The local
economy would stand to benefit enormously from these initiatives, resulting in
a whole reservoir of goodwill and cooperation.
A strategic placement of aid! It
would also provide an immediate destination for the Australian and Indonesian
Navy and the respective Customs departments.
They could cooperate to certainly significantly restrict the flow of
boats from that area.
The monies saved could also be better
invested in increasing the administrative support necessary to speed up the
processing times of the asylum seekers.
This would allow the speedy return of these asylum seekers who do not
meet the present government criteria.
It may also send a clearer message to
prospective asylum seekers and people smugglers resulting in a slowdown.
Such a solution would best be negotiated
simultaneously with the provincial heads in the Eastern provinces and at the
same time with Jakarta. The negotiations
must be done on the basis of equality and consensus and as much time spent as is
necessary to ensure that the Indonesian do not see this as solely an Australian
initiative for mutual benefit. The
benefit to the Eastern provinces would certainly assist.
The understanding and expertise is at
hand. All it needs is for both the
government and the opposition to listen.
Clearly the present approaches are not
working.
Peter Nevile.
July 2013
-
A Past President on the Australia Indonesia Business Council (AIBC)
-
A practising lawyer frequently in Indonesia with a significant number of
Indonesian clients
-
Executive Producer of a number of successful T.V. Quiz shows in
Indonesia
-
Consultant to the Victorian Government in Indonesia on a joint education
project.
Peter Nevile is right to highlight the logika v rasa issue – it’s critical in understanding different responses to crises. He could have added more on the way Indonesians see us, which is radically at odds with the way we view ourselves.
ReplyDeleteFor many – maybe most Indonesians – we’re still a colony and no history lesson will shift perceptions. We have the Union Jack on our flag and the Queen on our bank notes. Enough said.
We have less than 23 million people and an almost empty continent to ourselves. No geography or climatology lecture will alter that view.
We are rotten rich, godless and hedonistic – and that truth is reinforced every day in Kuta. We are also friendly and generous, but I doubt that the scales are even
Till recently we were also reminded by government officials seeking a put down that our ancestors were convicts and we treated Aborigines appallingly. Note that Iranians, Afghans and others want to get to Australia but Indonesians do not – not even the seriously persecuted Shiites and Ahmadiyas.
Why should Indonesia cooperate on the asylum seekers? They are causing problems in Indonesia, but these are minor; Ramadhan rituals, the cost of living and bad soccer are the major talking points. The asylum seekers say they want to go to Australia – so locals point the way, clip the ticket and get back to their lives.
Indonesia’s borders are porous and the coastline vast. But it is also true that it’s impossible for strangers to go unnoticed and their presence queried anywhere in the archipelago. The boats could not sail without tacit approval.
In the 1970s and 80s Vietnamese and Cambodians seeking asylum were housed at Pulau Galang in the Riau region. The Indonesians ran the camp using foreign and UNHCR funds, so there’s a precedent for the Ross Taylor idea.
However nothing is going to change unless Australia and Indonesia see the problem as equally serious for both nations and affecting their basic interests. That hasn’t happened yet.
Neville,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your article, however I feel your insight into Indonesia, and the underlying issues relating to asylum seekers are not as profound as you might think. Your observations are a little out of date and your simplistic solution would appear to be at odds with reality. You state “Clearly the present approaches are not working”. In fact there are no real sincere and genuine approaches that take a global perspective of the underlying issues, and a common sense mentality to a solution, should there be one.
I don’t agree that Indonesians are as sensitive as you portray, though they will play that card for all it is worth. The younger and well educated generation in particular are a little embarrassed as to the antics of the older generation Javanese harmony at all costs set of values (particularly considering the older generation are often wrong with what they say, but younger generation must accept it as being right). In fact I would go further and say many are ashamed.
You state “Indonesia is no more at fault than Australia for the “Boat People” problem.” This is entire incorrect from any practical assessment. People leave their country because they are oppressed, looking for a better future, typically from areas of over population and have paid to come to Australia. They transit through Indonesia because they can, simply because the local authorities have been paid, and we all know that to be the case regardless of the emotional denials of the beneficiaries. They come to Australia because of the message Australia demonstrates to the world, that the Australian Navy taxi is there for you, and the Australian taxpayer will pick up the bill, and your women and children get paid by the Australian Government. Naturally in Australia there massive resentment directed to the seemingly impotent politicians and bureaucrats, while in Indonesia those which are the beneficiaries of this system are compelled to launch the occasion emotional diatribe pointed at Australia.
Indonesians have absolutely no inclination to build a processing facility in Indonesia, anywhere. Why on earth would they. It is not what they do.
In reality the main causes of people smuggling are specific issues in the countries from where they came, an infrastructure and transit system where cash is king, and the message Australia advertises to the world.
They are the 3 primary culprits. Now we know there is no leader, politician or bureaucrat, or social leader that has the guts or courage to even open the debate. All other so called solutions or commentary that fails to even look at the supply chain of so called asylum seekers are a waste of time.