Tuesday, November 25, 2008

History as travelogue

“Yay, we had got it. President Habibie had agreed to the peacekeeping force.”

So gushes former Australian foreign affairs minister Alexander Downer in ABC TV’s The Howard Years (Episode 2), recounting the events in 1999 whereby the Howard Government had been dragged kicking-and-screaming to lead the UN intervention in the Indonesian military-sponsored violence against East Timorese civilians.

If Alex had any capacity for humility and candour, he might have expressed himself more accurately, for instance, thus:

“Phew, we hadn’t stuffed up so very comprehensively after all. Bill Clinton had leaned heavily on B.J. Habibie to agree to a peacekeeping force.”

For, indeed, the account in The Howard Years presents a very superficial, indeed incomplete, narrative of this episode in recent Australian history. The expression puffed-up also comes to mind.

From my recollections and impressions of the period, essentially the Government gravely deplored the violence against innocent Timorese, whilst earnestly sitting on its hands, pleading there was nothing that could be done. Howard and company even seemed to feign surprise, notwithstanding that accurate intelligence had given them ample forewarning of the violence that came to pass.

The silence — indeed the deep sleep — of Australia was broken by a largely trade union-led campaign which awakened grass-roots clamour for our Government to get off its arse and do something. I well remember the Victorian campaign, led passionately by then Trades Hall secretary Leigh Hubbard.

Sadly it wasn’t so much the former PM’s regard to the pleas of his people that tipped the scales. No, finally it was a gentle but firm word in the Government’s ear from the Clinton Whitehouse that inspired Mr Howard to act ‘decisively’ in spearheading the intervention — which was, of course, all but too late to stop much of the deadly violence.

As with the economic prosperity we now enjoy, the Howard Government’s apologists tend to credit the former PM with the impetus for the intervention. But in reality the impetus for the Australian-led mission in East Timor was due to the hard work and caring of ordinary Australians.

Much of my above remarks are taken from notes I made over a year ago. And, as if to quell the cognitive dissonance provoked by the account in The Howard Years, a recent article confirms much about my recollections here.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

The Magic of Alex: the Afterglow

Former Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer reviews former Indonesian dictator Suharto’s record:

Mr Downer said Indonesia’s treatment of East Timor was always a thorn in the relationship.

“We were plagued of course ... with the issue of East Timor,” he said.

“And of course president Suharto will have to live with that as part of his record as well.”

Memo Alex: Not only has Suharto not been president for almost ten years, he’s also no longer in a position to “live with” anything. It’s the Timorese and Indonesians who have to live with it.

And apparently the record of one of the world’s great kleptocrats escaped Alex’s attention:

Mr Downer said Australia was not aware of the full extent of corruption under Suharto’s rule.

He said human rights abuses in East Timor were discussed, but corruption did not feature in the dialogue between the two countries.

“We didn’t know too much about the level of corruption, but we knew about the human rights record,” he said.

Gee. If the Suharto Gravy Train didn’t rate in Alex’s perceptions, then small wonder that AWB malfeasance in the Iraq oil-for-food scandal passed him by.

What had the Australian people been paying Alex for, all those years?

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Suharto on the mend or maybe not

At first, reassuring news for dictator worshippers:

Suharto is improving, but his condition is still critical.

But now maybe celebrations should be put on hold:

Doctors in Indonesia say the condition of former president Suharto is deteriorating, with signs of internal bleeding and a build-up of fluid on his lungs.

Hopefully Suharto’s next public appearance will be in a glass-lidded coffin.

Labels: , ,

Friday, November 30, 2007

Sheridan 4 Howard 4 Evah!

Australian Prime Minister John Howard is only just on his way out, so it’s maybe a little early for hagiographies.

But Greg Sheridan’s latest column, titled “A tribute to John Howard”, begins in earnest the process of bowdlerisation and sanctification that will only end when Prime Minister Tony Abbott cuts the tape at the opening of the John Howard National Library.

For according to Sheridan, “Howard is an absolute giant of Australian history,” who ranks “among the top five strategic prime ministers in Australian history.” After which, Sheridan’s prose becomes decidely purple.

Apparently, John Howard has “remade national security policy at all levels.” Well, considering the man and his team had eleven long years stewardship of the nation’s foreign policy, it would be difficult not to have done so — although “mostly it has been evolution rather than revolution.”

Let’s consider for a minute the meaning of ‘evolution’. It can be thought of as cumulative, trial-and-error, random, hit-and-miss, incremental change that as likely as not culminates in evolutionary dead-ends. Think of the koala hanging for grim death to his eucalyptus tree, like a discarded hypothesis.

As for the ‘revolutionary’ aspects of Howard’s legacy, Sheridan is quite arguably being charitable in the examples he evinces, which could easily bear other interpretations. For example, here’s a glaring piece of cant that just barely manages to avoid the obvious:

In East Timor, although Australian policy was confused and ineffective leading up to the independence referendum of 1999, it was right for Australia to send troops to intervene after the militias began their killing spree.

Does a “confused and ineffective” policy indicate the strength in foreign policy that Sheridan attributes to Howard?

Anyway, how many times must this myth of the Howard Government’s ‘decisive’ action with regard to the conflagration in East Timor be debunked?

What really happened was that the Government gravely deplored the violence against innocent Timorese, while earnestly sitting on its hands and pleading there was nothing we could do. The Government even seemed to feign surprise, notwithstanding that accurate intelligence-gathering had given it forewarning of the violence.

The silence — indeed the deep sleep — of Australia was broken by a largely trade union-led campaign which awakened grass-roots clamour for our Government to get off its arse and do something.

But sadly it wasn’t the PM’s regard to his own people’s injunctions that tipped the scales. No, finally it was a gentle but firm word in the Government’s ear from the Clinton Whitehouse that inspired Mr Howard to act ‘decisively’ in spearheading the intervention — which was all but too late to stop much of the deadly violence.

As with the economic prosperity we now enjoy, the Government’s apologists tend to credit the PM with the impetus for the intervention. But in reality the impetus for the Australian-led mission in East Timor was due to the hard work and caring of many, many ordinary Australians.

Labor had left behind a grievously weakened army and the malign fiction of the Defence of Australia policy had left our forces almost undeployable.

The Howard Government was into its fourth year in office, and only by 1999 had begun to appreciate our “weakened” defence forces? Wow, such forward-looking perspicacity!!

Howard’s government had to manage incredibly complex diplomacy with the US and Indonesia, and indeed the rest of Southeast Asia, and send in thousands of under-equipped Australian troops when there was no guarantee there would not be substantial casualties and military disaster. Doing this took both exceptional courage and a high degree of operational competence. From that moment onwards, the Howard government began the overthrow of the stultifying orthodoxies of defence policy and began to re-equip our defence forces and begin the long business of expanding and vastly enhancing the Australian army.

“Incredibly complex diplomacy”? All the Howard Government really had to do was say “Yes” to the Clinton Whitehouse, and then lean on US authority to ride out the inevitable shitstorm of Indonesian resentment.

That “exceptional courage and high degree of operational competence” in fact belonged to the diggers, and their military command, that the Government finally sent over there — not to Mr Howard, who already had the strong support of those thousands of ordinary Australians in the street who begged his Government to act.

That “the Howard government began the overthrow of stultifying orthodoxies,” etc., is presumably Sheridan-speak for finally getting off their arses and getting things in order, more than three years and another election into their ministry.

Howard, and his close collaborator Alexander Downer, saw the election of George W. Bush as a strategic opportunity for Australia. They set out to secure a free trade agreement, enhanced military co-operation, better intelligence access, more Australian influence on US policy in Asia and much else. They succeeded in all their ambitions and, enormously to Australia’s benefit, have transformed the US alliance.

The Australia-US Free Trade Agreement was dead in the water until the Howard Government committed Australian forces to the misadventure in Iraq, whereupon forty US trade officials filed into the country — literally on the eve of the invasion — to hammer out Howard’s prize.

On Iraq, Howard made the right call on the information available, and it took incredible guts to do it. There were certainly no lies involved — every responsible authority was convinced Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction — and Howard will be vindicated by history.

On all of that, Greg, the jury is still out. And there’s lots of information available, with more surely to follow, that suggests very much the contrary.

Wrapping up, Sheridan offers:

The truth is, Howard was an old-fashioned gentleman, a decent bloke by any measure. He grew immeasurably during his leadership, but the essence of the man remained.

A decent man, a genuinely great prime minister and a giant in Australian foreign and security policy.

Mr Howard will lerv you too, Greg! Forever and amen!

Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Congratulations Indonesia!

Moving on from my previous post, it’s nice to see that Indonesia has been awarded the Democracy Medal by the International Association of Political Consultants.

I don’t know much about the IAPC or its award, but previous recipients of this prize have included Nelson Mandela and Aung San Suu Kyi.

And Indonesia’s President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono — who with his country is a co-recipient of the award — is fairly beaming with pride...

Although sceptics had claimed Indonesia would splinter or radicalise, “the heart and soul of Indonesia remains moderate and progressive”, Dr Yudhoyono said. “In Indonesia democracy, Islam and modernity go hand in hand.

“Democracy in Indonesia has reached a point of no return,” said the nation’s first directly elected president...

“Indonesia has proved that no matter the size of the population, the difficult geography, ethnic diversity, political complexity or historical background, democracy can come and grow.”

And long may Indonesia continue from strength to strength.

Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, November 12, 2007

Give a dictator an even break

In a recent column Greg Sheridan pleads, “If only Pervez were more like Suharto.”

Sometimes the word dictator can prevent clear thinking in the Western liberal mind, as often does the word war. But, as George Orwell observed, wars have results, and different wars have different results, depending who wins.

So it is with dictators. There are more and less ruthless, bloodthirsty, legitimate and effective dictators. The quality of the dictator influences profoundly the quality of the nation.

Ooh, Sheridan has my head spinning with all this ‘realist’ talk of mach politik... but I will persevere and take the plunge with him.

Sheridan denounces Musharraf as “a weak, ineffective and foolish dictator” because, for instance, he has failed to stem the rising tide of Islamist extremism in his country. Apparently such extremism in Indonesia is not an issue for Sheridan, forgetting that it’s almost certainly an issue for the victims of the Bali bombings and their families.

By contrast, Suharto was presumably a strong, effective and astute dictator, a veritable pin-up boy of dictatorhood by Sheridan’s lights.

Suharto was a dictator and there were many bad things about his rule, especially his human rights record. But here’s the complex bit: he built a modern Indonesia that was capable of sustaining democracy.

It may not occur to Sheridan, but it may be the case that Indonesian democracy survived despite Suharto, thanks to the aspirations and dedication of millions of his countrymen.

But okay, giving the much-maligned Suharto the benefit of the doubt, surely Sheridan doesn’t need it pointed out to him that Suharto had over two decades, not to mention thousands upon thousands of bloody corpses, head-start on Musharraf.

It’s early days yet, so Musharraf may yet earn his place in Sheridan’s pantheon of benevolent despots. Give a dictator an even break!

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Certainty affirmed

“I don’t know about my future but I am certainly the Foreign Minister.”

Australians all will breathe a sigh of relief at this affirmation that Mr Downer is keeping his eye on the ball for Australia.

“We are only focusing on winning the election. That is all we are thinking about at this stage and that is a big job.”

Our taxes at work. But still, Mr Downer has his finger on the pulse of Australia’s national interest on the world stage; for instance, with regard to General/President Musharraf’s experiments with Pakistan’s democracy...

“Well, he’s certainly, by certain standards, well he’s certainly by some standards a dictator.”

Well, Mr Downer is certainly on the right track there, the right track, certainly. Of course, as with Soeharto, the unequivocal denunciations will come after the General has gone on his merry way.

According to Prime Minister John Howard, Soeharto’s Indonesia was “not a democracy in the sense we understand it.”

After the fall of Soeharto, of course, it suddenly became safe for the Howard Government to describe that particular strong man as “a dictator”.

In the case of Musharraf, the diplomatic niceties are nominally in the service of Australia’s national interest in the ‘war on terror’.

In Soeharto’s case, it was all about the war on communism... No wait, Domino Theory was pre-1990, so in the Howard Era it must have been about keeping our strong-but-unstable-neighbour-to-the-north on side, in a ‘constructive engagement’ that mutually benefited both Australian commerce and, in a round-about, trickle-down sort of way, the Indonesian people.

Well anyway, the certainty is that a pretext will always be found to selectively coddle ‘our’ preferred sons’a’bitches.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,