It will take all the skills John Howard has honed in his 10 years as Australia's prime minister to stop a falling-out with Indonesia over the treatment of a boatload of asylum seekers who arrived from its troubled province of Papua in January.
"Relations between Indonesia and Australia are entering a difficult time that is full of challenges," Indonesian President Bambang Susilo Yudhoyono warned Howard when he learned that the Papuan independence activists had been allowed to stay rather than be turned away, as he had requested.
Jakarta has already recalled its ambassador over an action it sees as fomenting rebellion in the mostly Christian western half of an island that the world's most populous Muslim country shares with the sovereign state of Papua New Guinea. There have been calls for trade boycotts and a stop to joint efforts to curb people smuggling, illegal fishing and, most importantly, terrorism.
"I sent such a strong message to the people of West Papua," Howard said last week after Yudhoyono voiced anger at the visa awards.
"Don't imagine for a moment that we want you to come to Australia," he said.
True. Australia has no interest in becoming a haven for those among the 2.5 million people of Papua who want to follow East Timor's 1999 example and break free from the republic.
"The worst thing that could happen to the West Papuans would be the fragmentation of Indonesia," Howard said. "The best path forward for West Papua is to be part of a more prosperous, more democratic Indonesia."
Yudhoyono complains that giving asylum to Papuans who claim the Indonesian military is engaged in genocide is tantamount to giving credence to those genocide claims. He is demanding that good neighborliness and the strong personal rapport he has with Howard requires that Indonesia be allowed to vet the claims of persecution before those making them are given asylum.
Dino Kusnadi, a spokesman for the Indonesian embassy in Canberra, put it this way: "We thought that as partners and also as close neighbors that we have been omitted in the process of verifying the claims of the Papuan asylum seekers. I stress that if there are reports of human-rights violations, please report it to us. It will be settled, and we will finish the issues of Papua in a peaceful, just and dignified manner."
Papua is closed to the foreign press. The Indonesian military's human-rights record there, as elsewhere, is not good. Claims of torture, rape and murder go unchecked in Papua. Howard does not deny the abuses.
"Of course it's unfair for somebody to go to jail for 15 years for flying the wrong flag," he said. "That doesn't mean to say we shouldn't take a broad, reasonably hard-headed approach about what is in this country's best interests and also in the best interests of the longer-term relationship."
But domestic politics dictates that Howard can't simply turn boats around and leave rejected asylum seekers to a parlous fate on their return. It would also be unacceptable from Indonesia's point of view for Howard to link progress on a long-promised autonomy deal for Papua to the treatment of asylum seekers.
But Yudhoyono doesn't hold all the cards. It's a different Indonesia from the dictatorship that former president Suharto maintained for 32 years. Dozens, not hundreds, have turned up for demonstrations outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta.
And Yudhoyono, just like Howard, can find himself pilloried in the press for inept diplomatic footwork. Political commentator Soedjati Djiwandono told the Jakarta Post that "never has Indonesian diplomacy shown its clumsiness and short-sightedness more clearly than in dealing with the current issue of the 43 asylum seekers."
The dynamics of a newly democratic Indonesia gives former Jakarta ambassador David Ritchie confidence that Howard and Yudhoyono can ride out a stormy patch in the relationship.
"We have a lot in common, we have a lot of shared interests, and I've seen the depth of that relationship," Ritchie said. "I wish the relationship was warmer, but we will live through it. We have a lot to offer each other."
Howard and Yudhoyono will be looking for a compromise that will allow them to paper over the cracks. Jakarta responded with enthusiasm to a pledge from Howard that he would review the adjudication process for asylum seekers.
"Whatever comes out of that review, you can be certain that we'll continue to meet our international obligations, but we'll also pay proper regard to the importance of the relationship between Australia and Indonesia," Howard said.
He will be hoping that the compromise he hatches will be enough to appease Jakarta. He won't worry too much about upsetting those few who present Australia as a beacon for all those Indonesians unhappy with rule from Jakarta.
There aren't many Australian voters gleeful about the prospect of putting up hundreds of thousands of displaced Papuans.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS