AUKUS and B-52’s stand in the way of a treaty with Indonesia

A recent meeting of ministers generated a swag of the usual cliched statements, but also some hope of strengthening our relationship with our closest neighbour. But there are obstacles on both sides of the Timor Sea, reports Duncan Graham from Indonesia.

Are Australia and Indonesia heading towards a security agreement or treaty much like the one recently signed with Japan, an upgrade of a pact signed in 2007?

Statements following the Eighth Australia-Indonesia Foreign and Defence Ministers’ “2+2 Meeting” earlier this month have spurred such speculation. The two-day meeting between Defence Minister Prabowo Subianto and his counterpart, Richard Marles, plus the two Foreign Ministers, Retno Marsudi and Penny Wong, ended with a statement of intent to elevate the 2021 Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) to an agreement that’s binding under international law.

To stress that this wasn’t to be filed under hereafter, officials were told “to undertake negotiations expeditiously.” An unnecessary add if the public servants do their jobs.

But they may not get that far. The Jakarta Post editorialised that: “As the Indonesian political world is setting its sights on the Feb. 14, 2024, elections, it is unlikely that the House of Representatives will review, let alone ratify, any incoming bilateral cooperation pact.”

From agreement to treaty

The DCA deal with Indonesia and the Morrison government had documents signed covering counter-terrorism, defence and cybersecurity.

The possibility of extending it to a new defence treaty was applauded by some commentators. But a treaty is very different to an agreement or even a pact, and has to be binding under international law. That hasn’t happened and won’t if Indonesia stays on the foreign policy track it has trodden since liberation in 1948.

In reality, the pledges cover basics, like ‘”reciprocal access to training ranges and streamlined entry and exit processes .. working together on military medicine, military technology, defence industry and exploring ways to make it easier for our militaries to work together.”

If “exploring” leads to “a stable, peaceful, resilient and prosperous Indo-Pacific,” then it doesn’t overly matter if this is little and late provided it gathers momentum, not dust. Don Rothwell, Professor of International Law at ANU, predicts many challenges negotiating of the proposed new agreement. “I suspect it will be a very dynamic process.”

He told this writer that the Japan agreement “could be a precedent for an equivalent agreement with Indonesia … and (that’s) what Australia may have in mind.”

But Indonesia would not share that thinking. Its “mendayung antara dua karang” (rowing between two reefs) policy, means it doesn’t side with world powers …(which) “would be incompatible with the country’s national philosophy.”

Rothwell foresees a lengthy process and multiple difficulties: “One sticking point – as it was in the Australia/Japan treaty – is whether ADF personnel and associated civilian components visiting Indonesia would be subject to the death penalty if convicted of certain crimes.”

The Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement was only ratified by Indonesia in 2020 after a decade of on-off talkathons. This was a trade deal involving grains and beef, nothing so inflammatory as sovereign rights and weaponry.

Also significant is what apparently wasn’t discussed: the whales in the pond of US plans to rotate up to six nuclear-capable B-52 bombers through the Tindal air base south of Darwin.

Parking Lot B-52: does the escalation of US troops and installations make Australia a bigger target?

The Global Times run by the Chinese Communist Party quoted Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian saying “the US move has escalated regional tensions, seriously sabotaged regional peace and stability, and could trigger a regional arms race.”

AUKUS is not helping

These concerns were also expressed by Jakarta when the AUKUS deal was announced in 2021. The plan is for eight nuclear-powered submarines.

Since then, we’ve learned through a Senate estimates hearing that the B-52s may fly nuclear weapons. However both sides fell back on the old “warhead-ambiguity” formula, neither confirming nor denying that they carry 32-tonnes of megadeath. This appears to satisfy Canberra, though Jakarta will not be so appeased.

Back in her homeland, Foreign Minister Marsudi was reported as saying she wanted “transparency and the commitment [to stop] nuclear proliferation.” But, and most curiously, she was referring to the AUKUS sub deal which won’t see craft slip underwater for a decade, not the Stratofortresses soaring overhead now.

There are 35 US bases in Australia according to an anti-base organisation which includes seismic and weather stations. The government says these are not foreign bases but facilities. Whatever the language and how partisan the source, Uncle Sam has no problem taking a kip in Oz, but would stay sleepless in Indonesia.

And imagine the terror across our wide brown land if Chinese H-20 stealth bombers (range 8,500 km) were in Flores, distance to Canberra and back 8,200 km. Indonesia’s “no-sides” policy negates that scenario.

What about the people smugglers?

Also seemingly off the table were people smugglers. Australia has upped sea patrols following recent visa changes. It would deepen the much ballyhooed cooperation if Indonesia’s navy helped prevent illegal departures.

There are around 14,000 asylum seekers stranded in Indonesia. Your correspondent has interviewed skilled English-speaking professionals from Afghanistan and Iran stranded in East Java. They’re wasting in a legal limbo – some for a decade – as Indonesia hasn’t signed the 1951 UN Refugee Convention that Australia merely pays lip-service to.

Even if people smugglers came knocking, the families are broke. They’ll eventually have to be relocated.

Indonesia’s neutrality vs Australia’s loyalty

Indonesia lacks the access Australia has to large overseas groupings, like the Anglo sphere, the Quad and the Commonwealth. As a Muslim-majority nation it’s a member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation along with 56 other states, though this is more concerned with devotion than defence.

Indonesia is the key member of ASEAN and Australia says it wants to work with the bloc. But the 55-year old organisation is seen as “slow, ineffective and incapable of dealing with recent developments” according to a Singapore study with its members at “risk of becoming proxies’ to the major powers.”

And that’s a primeval fear across Indonesia. There’ll be more platitudes, a tinkering at the edges of policy and happy-snaps, but no join-us treaty anytime soon. But at least everyone’s talking, and will have personal numbers on speed dial when things go bad.

Stranger danger – Indonesia’s next president could be a threat beyond the archipelago