The figures speak for themselves, the coalition is winning the asylum battle.
It is surely remarkable that the Indonesian military has declared that it is moving naval assets to the south of its archipelago for the specific purpose of combating people-smuggling. That is exactly what the Indonesian government has announced it will do.
The spokesman for the Senior Security Minister, Djoko Suyanto, last week said, precisely: ‘‘The increased security measures in the southern part of the country is in order to anticipate increased illegal migrant activities.’’
This very action, deploying some of the Indonesian Navy to interdict illegal immigrant vessels, is exactly what Canberra has been asking Indonesia to do for a decade or more. Up until now, Jakarta has never really done it. Its security concerns rest entirely to its north. It certainly does not see Australia as any kind of military threat. So, given that this has been a chief aim of Australian bilateral diplomacy for years, and that it has now been achieved, the Abbott government must surely be basking in the praise of Australian commentators. Well, not exactly.
First, a lot of commentators are determined that the Abbott government can do nothing effective or right in foreign policy. But to be fair, a more important factor is the confusing nature of Indonesian policy in recent weeks. Not long before Djoko’s announcement other Indonesian military figures, nowhere near as senior as Djoko but important nevertheless, had announced that Indonesia would move naval resources to the south to guard against Australian incursions into Indonesian waters. This followed the Australian Border Protection Command discovering that some Australian ships had accidentally strayed into waters inside Indonesia’s 12-nautical-mile zone. Immediately this was realised, the Abbott government notified Jakarta, apologised unreservedly and instituted an internal investigation.
These statements thrilled the most vocal enemies of the Abbott government within Australia as they seemed to promise what these folks have long ardently wished for — a full blown crisis between Canberra and Jakarta. But within a couple of days, the Indonesian government line had changed totally and in fact was delivering exactly what Australia most wanted. These comments from Djoko’s spokesman chimed with statements by Indonesia’s Foreign Minister, Marty Natalegawa, that any naval moves in Indonesia’s south were ‘‘not an unfriendly act’’ towards any other nation. So the Indonesian government position moved radically within a couple of days.
As of writing, it doesn’t appear that the Indonesians have actually moved any military resources in any direction at all.
What this episode lays bare, I think, is the extreme difficulty most mainstream Australian commentators, who know more or less nothing about Indonesian politics or policy, have in interpreting what the Indonesians are actually saying and doing in response to the Abbott government’s boats policies.
First of all, despite all the various rhetoric around the place, this has not been a first-order issue in the Indonesian media or Indonesian politics.
Second, the overwhelming recent impetus for Indonesian nationalist reaction against Australia has been the spying revelations of the former US intelligence employee, Edward Snowden.
Third, and most important, Indonesian policy has been reactive and at times incoherent, mainly because it is reacting to its own domestic politics. It is not even reacting primarily to Australian actions, but rather to how they play out within Indonesian politics. The Indonesians knew about Australian boat-turnarounds from the moment they occurred, but didn’t react to the policy until it became an issue of controversy within Indonesia itself.
There has been a wilful determination from many Australian commentators to mischaracterise the Abbott government’s approach. Many refuse to accept that the boatpeople issue is in any way a serious matter of national interest for Australia, much less national security.
Yet the determined illegal immigration to Europe of North Africans and people f rom the wider Middle East, who have used the terminology of asylum and refugee to disable normal European policy responses, has been right at the heart of the crisis of contemporary European social democracy.
The Abbott government has determined that even if it means wearing some significant shortterm pain in its relationship with Indonesia, it is determined to stop the boats. A piece I wrote a week and a half ago outlining this has been widely mischaracterised on the ABC as indicating the Abbott government’s willingness to allow the relationship with Indonesia to disintegrate if necessary to stop the boats. That is completely untrue. There is a world of difference between being willing to endure some short-term pain in a relationship and letting the total relationship disintegrate. The Abbott government certainly has a serious policy disagreement with the Indonesian government, which would rather Canberra did not turn boats around. But the truth is the Indonesians have absolutely no serious policy alternative. Their only policy response is to say let’s talk about the issue across the region under the Bali process. That is a recipe for absolute inaction and total surrender. Under the Abbott government’s policy, not a single boat has reached Australia or unloaded people into Australian custody since December 19 last year. There is a very long way to travel on all these issues, but that is a fantastic victory for the policies of the Abbott government and the ministerial troika of Tony Abbott, Julie Bishop and Scott Morrison. The single line of ministerial responsibility for implementing the policy, through Morrison, has been an operational key to its success.
Over the last week or so, the Indonesians have clearly wound down their rhetoric and response, seemingly for three key reasons. One, the response is incident-driven; if there are no boats, there are no incidents. Two, the Indonesians recognise that it is in their interests if the boat trade stops, even if they disagree with how the Abbott government is stopping it. Three, the Abbott government's steadiness of policy here has made it clear that complaining about the policy won't have any effect. This issue has a long way to run and it is inherently unpredictable. But so far we know for sure that the boats have stopped and no serious or permanent damage has been done to the relationship with Indonesia. That, surely, is a good outcome.
Greg Sheridan writes for The Australian where this article originally appeared 4 February.
There has been a wilful determination from many Australian commentators to mischaracterise the Abbott government’s approach. Many refuse to accept that the boatpeople issue is in any way a serious matter of national interest for Australia, much less national security.
Yet the determined illegal immigration to Europe of North Africans and people f rom the wider Middle East, who have used the terminology of asylum and refugee to disable normal European policy responses, has been right at the heart of the crisis of contemporary European social democracy.
The Abbott government has determined that even if it means wearing some significant shortterm pain in its relationship with Indonesia, it is determined to stop the boats. A piece I wrote a week and a half ago outlining this has been widely mischaracterised on the ABC as indicating the Abbott government’s willingness to allow the relationship with Indonesia to disintegrate if necessary to stop the boats. That is completely untrue. There is a world of difference between being willing to endure some short-term pain in a relationship and letting the total relationship disintegrate. The Abbott government certainly has a serious policy disagreement with the Indonesian government, which would rather Canberra did not turn boats around. But the truth is the Indonesians have absolutely no serious policy alternative. Their only policy response is to say let’s talk about the issue across the region under the Bali process. That is a recipe for absolute inaction and total surrender. Under the Abbott government’s policy, not a single boat has reached Australia or unloaded people into Australian custody since December 19 last year. There is a very long way to travel on all these issues, but that is a fantastic victory for the policies of the Abbott government and the ministerial troika of Tony Abbott, Julie Bishop and Scott Morrison. The single line of ministerial responsibility for implementing the policy, through Morrison, has been an operational key to its success.
Over the last week or so, the Indonesians have clearly wound down their rhetoric and response, seemingly for three key reasons. One, the response is incident-driven; if there are no boats, there are no incidents. Two, the Indonesians recognise that it is in their interests if the boat trade stops, even if they disagree with how the Abbott government is stopping it. Three, the Abbott government's steadiness of policy here has made it clear that complaining about the policy won't have any effect. This issue has a long way to run and it is inherently unpredictable. But so far we know for sure that the boats have stopped and no serious or permanent damage has been done to the relationship with Indonesia. That, surely, is a good outcome.
Greg Sheridan writes for The Australian where this article originally appeared 4 February.
No comments:
Post a Comment