Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid took considerable risks in coming into Australia. Mr Wahid faces an impeachment hearing in six weeks’ time. His political opponents in Indonesia have tried to get some mileage out of his absence from the country, arguing that he should be dealing with problems at home or rather than undertaking yet another of his many overseas trips – – particularly to Australia, the country that had so many troops in Timor in 1999.
It must be borne in mind also that the Australian that Prime Minister, John Howard, faces an election at the end of this year. In these circumstances it would be easy to dismiss President Wahid’s trip as merely symbolic and not of any lasting and value. However, it appears that the risk taken by Mr Wahid was worth taking because it is unlikely that the trip will affect the outcome of the hearing in any event and it appears that the trip has achieved quite a deal for both Australia and Indonesia.
The trip went well beyond the symbolic. There was a commitment to further visits by the President of Indonesia, whoever it might be, and the Prime Minister of Australia, whoever that might be. This was a clear sign by both leaders to move away from situation where the relationship between the two neighbours becomes dependent upon the personal relationship between their leaders. This will certainly put vice-president Megawati on the spot should it she succeed Mr Wahid in August. There will be some pressure on her to keep the momentum up for improving Indonesian-Australian relations. Without the Wahid visit she could have continued her fairly cool attitude to Australia without undue questioning. On the Australian side, both of Mr Howard’s likely successors – – Peter Costello or Kim Beazley – – will want to continue to improve relations with the Indonesia.
It is important that the relationship is not dependent on the relationship between that the leaders of the day. One could argue that that was the state of affairs while Paul Keating was Prime Minister. That said, Mr Keating had a far better grasp of the importance of Asia to Australia than Mr Howard. There have been indications that Mr Howard is at last changing his attitude that the US and Britain were the most important relationships for Australia to the detriment of other relationships. The reinstatement of an Australian television service into Asia is one sign of that and statements made during the Wahid visit were further good signs.
There was give and take on both sides. Australian and Indonesian leaders, ministers and other officials stressed the importance of putting Timor behind them. Mr Wahid also stressed the importance of chasing down the perpetrators of militia violence in the aftermath of the referendum that resulted in Timor’s independence. On security, Mr Howard restated Australia’s continued respect for Indonesian territorial integrity while supporting any Indonesian move to give greater autonomy to West Papua and Aceh.
There is so much a benefit for both nations that it is important that whatever the fate of the two present leaders, it is crucial that relations continue to improve. Already on this trip the two foreign ministers signed a memorandum of understanding on tourism and an agreement has been reached to establish a marine working party. Such things have benefits for the peoples of both nations. Further co-operation on matters such as trade, people smuggling, cultural exchanges and security will add two at the benefits.
It has been 25 years since an Indonesian President has visited Australia. Australians and Indonesians should be grateful to Mr Wahid for having the courage to break the ice. He has shown himself to be a man not deserving the fate of impeachment which almost inevitably awaits him.