Indonesian Foreign Policy, Elections, And Struggle For Justice | Dr. Shafiah Muhibat

Good to hear from Indonesia which is increasingly is a becoming a force to be reckoned with. TQ Pascal for inviting Dr. Shafiat Muhibat. I am looking forward to Indonesia's work on the ICJ with respect to Israel which may have a big impact. Something which the west should have done much earlier instead doing the opposite. Shame on the west.

To the collective west, 'neutrality' is a fighting word. I'm not sure it's so for China.

😅 instead of helping victims of imperialism overseas, the Indonesian government should have started to help the victims of their own imperialism in Timor Leste, Papua and Atceh😅

Btw how many people did Indonesia kill during the US backed purge in the 60s? 😅 1 million?

Other than Taiwan, I wouldn't say China is competing. China makes its offers and the US swoops in w/ threats of security and sanctions. Whatever the case, China doesn't have military bases nor has it requested military bases or installations in any of the ASEAN countries. Vietnam has managed to strike and maintain that balance—fiercely asserting its sovereignty and neutrality w/ both. And given their history w/ both–the ASEAN states should look to Vietnam on how to navigate this time and period of paradigm shift.

The Indonesians have to choose between bad and worst and guess what? Yes, you are right: they are about choossing worst. They are about to choose a blood thirsty, power hungry American factotum who´s been threatenig – through his lackies – the poor with denying them their, already short, rice rations. "If you dont vote right, will know and it will have consecuences". Check his past and you´ll se what I mean. "The massacre was a stupid thing to do. It was done before the press. If you want to do it, you do it where nobody sees you". That´s the principles of the monster they are about to elect. China is not your enemy, lady. Your enemy is your "friend": the western powers that are destroying Your country. Once they are done, they will abandon you or , even worse, they will kill you or put you behind bars.

This "reaearcher" seems very reasonable – unless you know Indonesian history.

For example, at 8:05 she says

"…there is a caveat here…given the changes that China is going through…"

Funny she's only worried about China becoming "more assertive". What about the US?

FACT: The CIA was instrumental in overthrowing the democratically-elected Sukarno government, and then supporting the dictator, Suharto, for nearly thirty years.

But like all good Western puppets, she's worried about China 🤦🏻‍♂️

Then, she tips her hand further as to her bias at 11:55, when she says:

"…Quad, AUKUS… China was very aggressive with its BRI projects…"

She's equating economic projects of the BRI with actual MILITARY pacts like the Quad and AUKUS? Is she serious?

Unfortunately, many of my fellow Southeast Asians still have the colonial mindset – if it's not white, then it's not right.

NZ's been hijacked by a right wing govt, backed by an American born lobby group. For now… we're working on it.

Pascal on Crosstalk this morning! I always start my Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays with Crosstalk. It was a pleasure to see you there, Pascal.

divine central authority unity with substantive human rights choice id international law, which is being violated by UN political government / two state solution

In the study of conflict resulting out of the migration of large cultural groups, usually as part of agendas or expansion.
What is presently happening, as a part of a wider conflict going back at least 100 years, is the immigration of a superior culture of lighter skin-colored cultural ingroup, injected onto a darker skin-colored cultural outgroup.
The favored ingroup coming from outside (people born elsewhere) received land, livestock, and a home of sorts, all based on the advantage of having "friends in the right places", and having more resources at hand for the own aims and goals. In return, they become what the USA did during their own expansion into North America, the "farms/forts", which if "shot at" would always be "just defended", or "shooting back" (see below essays for more examples of this strategy or "101 playbook of imperialism" for expansion of the own systems).
The "settler colonist" (system) is the TOOL of expansion.
While the existing population was squeezed out of strategically vital areas one step at a time (arable farmland, for example, or sources of water), the faraway controlling political movement sought widespread support from whoever would give it, specifically from very imperialistic indoctrinated "friendly systems", for the own expansive goals. Real or at least tacid support for the "own -ism" is bought from large organization, like the UN for example.
People who came with the well-wishing of large portions of the "ingroup"-supporters ("-isms"), or at least indifferent/ignorant of the real issues and therefore largely complacent, created a culture of "settler colonialism", creating a "storyline" that if such a settler colonist is attacked in any way, that they will be "just defending themselves". The original imperialist expansion (industrial/financial/argricultural/mining/raw materials/ideological, etc.), of "settler colonialism" being the cause of conflict, is simply never questioned at all…
Of course, one does not need a cristal ball, or be a Nostradumbass in order to predict that conflict was bound to take place, in view of previously unfolding similar series of historical events, in other places in the world, where people with an "-ism", emboldened by a feeling of cultural superiority, following a prescribed set of steps as strategy, in order to gain a superior political/economic position for the own "tribe" (tribalism).

When one studies the various perspectives about human conflict, one can't help wondering who is most to blame.
Is it:
1) the various enablers and deciders as executive powers? (leaderships)
2) those who saw financial opportunities to exploit, specifically in case troubles/strife ensued? (opportunists)
3) those who wished to proliferate themselves, advance personal carriers, or similar free-riders, but otherwise had no real POWER as executives? (political expediency of choosing sides)
4) the huddled masses without land, who decided to take the lifeline thrown at them, despite knowing that they were imposing on another already existing indigenous population? (chosen ingroup)
5) the indigenous population, mostly equally "huddled masses" just trying to eke out a living, but who were never asked what they wanted for themselves as collective? (chosen outgroup)
6) any other, or a different order, since this is an open question

It should not be too difficult to conclude that responsibility for the resulting conflict goes pretty much in the order of 1 to 5, with those mostly responsible being the few "deciders" (as 1). These should not only have been in the position to foresee trouble ahead, but also to acknowledge these foreseeable events, and then search alternatives.

Only…

…the unfolding series of events did not take place in the Middle East, and did not involve London, the British Empire, France, or any other western power.

The conflict mentioned in the first paragraphs, has been taking place with gathering momentum over the past 100 years, is taking place in Irian Jaya (Indonesia) of course.
I hope nobody concluded is was about some other place somewhere else in the world…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papua_conflict
The "strategic encroachment" as part of such "outgroup"-agendas must be searched for…
"During the late 20th century Indonesia resettled 300,000 farmers to the restive province of West Papua, transforming its demographic composition. Such resettlement, or ‘transmigration’, was quite limited until the mid-1980s and restricted to only certain areas of West Papua. What accounts for the incidence of transmigration? Using a panel of all transmigration, ethnic cleansing and demographic change data in each regency of West Papua during 1964-2000 compiled from confidential government sources, I show that, after an aborted Papuan uprising in 1984, Indonesia cleansed and settled its border with Papua New Guinea to forestall cross-border insurgent activity. I then show that after the Grasberg gold mine was opened in 1990 Indonesia cleansed and settled the area around the mine." from the introduction of "Indonesian Settler Colonialism in West Papua", 10 Jun 2020, Lachlan McNamee, University of California, Los Angeles

According to the "NIMBY"-principle, most people actually do not care much about unfolding events far away, so are most likely completely unaware that there even is a simmering conflict somewhere else. According to "NIMBY" however, should the shoe be on the other foot, and the own existence becomes "encroached upon" by an outside migrating group (immigrants/refugees), all of similar background, it doesn't take long for the observed "unease" to begin. Firstly, in the form of lots of moaning and groaning, then if no political action changing the course of events results, the "steps" gradually increase in the level of violence exerted. Firstly there would be randomly organized protests, then larger forms of civil unrest, more property damage, more arson, the first deaths, and so on, and so on, until there is a large scale revolution. Any wise political leadership will always head off such series of unfolding events, but there must be a recognition that action is called for. If not, the series of events always follow predictable patterns, regardless of the tier of events, the cultural background of those involved, the gods these people pray to, the ideology, or the language spoken.

I want to live in Indonesia. My heart has already immigrated.

Wishy washy

I'm confused about the guest referring to China as increasing applying pressure. My understanding of China's economic relationship is that they stay away from politics. Isn't this incorrect?

Why would China being viewed as a threat to Indonesia? China and Indonesia only has overlapped so-claimed exclusive economic zone (EEZ) dispute over a limited areas of seawater at southern tip of South China sea where fisherman from both countries today are unimpeded by both countries to fish free anytime anywhere in it. On the contrary, Indonesia constant threat comes from the collective West (Australia in particular) evidenced by a series of historical events viewed by the majority of Indonesia including 1)firstly the US interest hike induced local economic collapse after Asian financial crisis 1998, 2)secondly the insurgency and independence of Timor Leste provoked and supported by Australia and the collective West between 1999~2002, and 3)the introduction of nuclear submarine by AUKUS 2022 involving UK and US constitute a direct national security threat to Indonesia.

An observation aimed to debunk. ASEAN countries had been neighbors with China over 2,000+ years without losing an inch of land whilst trading with China flush as always till today. ASEAN was colonized, however, by the West after 17 century who still threating regional peace as we speak. As a lesson learned, ASEAN DOES have a strategy to counterbalance external great power which is “unity”. This is an unspoken reason why all regional countries, small & weak in both economy and military terms, decided to join hand to form ASEAN which proven success not only economically, but politically as well to prevent the notorious “divide and rule” Western policy from successful once again in this homeland roughly 100M people.

From what I had interacted with Indonesian, I could confidently say that Palestine issue weights a lot more than Ukraine conflict when it comes to international news for Indonesian. This is NOT strange at all because Indonesia, like Palestine, is a member state of global Muslim community. Blood is thicker than water, after all.

The west will go down because everyone can see they are Murders of muslims