I searched in vain on NPR's site for an archive of a report I heard this morning about the notion, being advocated by Paul Wolfowitz and others in the Department of Extra-Homeland Defense, that the U.S. should get re-cozy with the Indonesian military. Paul "Superhawk" Wolfowitz was on the radio championing his thesis that it's time to accept the reality that the best way to encourage democracy in a country is through the tried and true method of getting their professional soldiers together with ours and so by a kind of martial osmosis transmit our values. A kind of trickling down of human rights then follows as surely as Evil follows Axis.
I don't mean to sneer too reflexively. But I can't help but raise an eyebrow. This is a vintage cold-war strategy for international relations -- we're now fighting "terror" but basically the idea seems awfully familiar: still the same right-wing desire to cozy up to any reasonably palatable dictatorship or military backed semi-democracy, trade a certain not-well-specified amount of training and equipment, and hope that the number of communist-- excuse me, I meant terrorist -- partisans you wind up bagging outweighs the bags of mail Amnesty International sends concerning whatever communities/ethnicities/political groups/islands get tromped on by the way. If everyone has forgotten as much about East Timor as it seems, well, then chances are good nobody's going to even notice if we have to give up this "embargo" on military aid.
And, aside from providing assistance the War Against Terror*, the local military will also, by dint of discussing Tom Paine, Plato, and Thoreau with the members of American military units, slowly evolve into ambassadors of virtue. Yes, that's the ticket!
Those who know something more than this about the situation, feel absolutely free to tell me why my cynicism is misplaced.
*As long as we're fighting a war against terror, I think we should also take on Horror, which is something I think we can all agree we recoil in far too frequently. Until Maine and Louisiana extradite Stephen King and Anne Rice to the Hague, we will never be free of this scourge.
Posted by BT at June 18, 2002 05:17 PMAustralia has had similar "military partnerships" with Indonesia in the past, which is prudent considering they are an extremely large country immediately to the north. I'm not sure of the current situation - relatiosn have cooled somewhat since Australia was the primary peace-keeping force in East Timor. Not to mention political sparring over people smuggling.
Did this sort of thing have something to do with East Timor gaining independence, even a small amount. To be honest, I'm not sure. It's interesting that this is pitched as a maneuver to encourage democracy. Australia has also sponsored Human Rights conference in countries to also try this sort of thing, and claimed success when recently a jailed opposition leader was released. I apologise for not giving more facts, but the World Cup has driven all such facts from my brain, and some guick googling gave me no joy.
Posted by: Garthmeister J on June 18, 2002 07:25 PMI think, basically, that after we pound the roughly 8 guys left in Abu Sayyaf into sand, and presuming we haven't found that bearded fellow that everyone wants to chat with, we're going to need another victory over terror.
Also, a strong military in Indonesia means we only have to worry about one country, as opposed to thirty or forty. And it probably streamlines arms sales, as well.
I found it interesting, though obviously people who check this site know better than me, that Australia is backing our "invade for thinking bad thoughts" policy. What's up their particular sleeve?
Posted by: hackly_fracture on June 19, 2002 01:46 PMTwo words: free trade. Or if you prefer: federal subsidies. The US is an extremely large trading partner of Australia's - we export a lot of produce etc. to the US, which is worth a LOT of moolah. The subsidies to farmers etc. is a large problem for Australia, as it hurts our export market. A couple of times in the last few years the Australian Prime Minister has gone over to the US to beg the President to cut/abolish subsidies for lamb, or wheat or whatever.
So, basically, the Australian government doesn't want to end up in the US' bad books. This is important not only for Australia's farmers, but for Australia's government, which has a loyal rural support base (it is a long-standing coalition between two political parties, one meant to represent country areas).
By the way, the government has been under fire in the media for making the "invade for thinking bad thoughts" (as you put it) policy of the US. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.
Posted by: Garthmeister J on June 19, 2002 07:18 PM