Challenges in Australia-Indonesia Diplomatic Relations

Essay- Given that many commentators view Australia and Indonesia as natural regional allies, why has it proven so difficult for the two countries to forge a stable and productive relationship?

Australia and Indonesia have found that there are numerous concerns that contribute to their stable and constructive connection. Indeed, the main barriers such as the distinct closeness of these countries and the fundamental differences alters the attitudes of the citizens and their leaders. Other matters in Australian and Indonesian societies were also built around terrorism, execution, trade and defence; however, with all these setbacks the commentators were still keen to view Australia and Indonesia as natural allies.

Indonesia’s executions of Andrew

He states that most Australians view Indonesia ‘as an undemocratic, militaristic, aggressive power’ (p.16). This demonstrates that the executions formed a shift in the attitudes of citizens and the Australian leaders. Due to these circumstances, Indonesians were seen as troublesome, unfair and destructive. With all these affairs, the Australian leaders were unable to execute actions in order to defend their citizens, and there is evidence that ‘neither a Coalition nor a Labor government can be relied upon invariably to manage such disputes well’ (pp.8). As a result of this, Australian leaders made the decision to limit the number of Indonesian students in the search for education in Australia. This meant that the access to numerous informal and formal networks such as tutors and educational institutions were unreachable. According to Gareth Evans and Bruce Grant (1995) ‘Australia and Indonesia differ profoundly in language, culture, religion, history, population size and in political, legal and social systems’ (p.8). This indicates that the

Derek McDougall (2001) mentions that the intensification of the violence in East Timor (1975), was a setback for Australia and Indonesia. He observes that there were numerous activities such as violation of laws, materials, arms and more. These activities were the cause of low defence between the two countries. There is evidence that states ‘towns were destroyed and many people were forced into the hills, or into neighbouring West Timor. Many East Timorese lost their lives’ (p. 94). With all these affairs, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad reinforces his views in that ‘Australia is not "Asian" in any sense and therefore its attempts to become more involved in Asian affairs should be resisted by Asian country’ (p.81). This illustrates that the Australian leaders were entrenched with attitudes of unease; this meant that there was considerable attention on criticism for the contribution in Indonesian affairs. There is evidence that states ‘Australia felt vulnerable to the emergence of hostile Asian powers’ (p.83). This showcases that Australia was in a unsafe state from the surface of Asian influence however, at the same time has to consider the United States and the British as central to its defence. To summarise, the commentators continue to view Australia’s contribution to the Asian leaders valuable in terms of defence and