Search

The US and Indonesia, two countries that fought for freedom, are fascinating subjects to delve more into, despite their great distance from one another and their distant times of conflict. This research used a Transnational American Studies perspective and comparative-historical analysis. By using comparative historical analysis, this research aimed to explore the similarities and differences that exist in the journey of American independence and Indonesian independence. The results of this research showed that even though the independence movements in the US and Indonesia occurred several centuries apart, they had the same goal, namely opposing colonialism. Both showed the same enthusiasm to fight colonial power and the desire to determine the fate of their nation without interference from other parties. Thomas Paine and Bung Tomo through their writings and speeches led the spirit of independence in the US and Indonesia. Even though they use different communication styles, both have an impact in forming the spirit of resistance and unity of their nation. Additionally, by looking at the history of the struggle of the Indonesian people, it can be seen the spirit of freedom that the US promoted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States had developed trade relations with the Dutch East Indies before World War I. In the 1920s, American diplomatic services prepared reports on the economic and political situation in the Dutch colony. The U.S. wanted to defend their interests in the region. In 1949, after several years of attempts to regain power in Indonesia, the Dutch withdrew in the absence of American support. A decade later, suchlike events occurred in connection with Dutch New Guinea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indonesia's deforestation is a crisis of global proportions. Its causes are highly complex, spanning local social and community dynamics to national political hierarchies and global corporate politics, current and historic. Development plays a key role, with global neo-liberal imperatives leveraged, resisted and competing with myriad multi-level agendas and actors. Gramscian analysis of logics and ideology, which combine to construct a global and local "common sense," helps to explain the mixed messages of policy and conservation, which themselves make Indonesian deforestation and its solutions so complicated. Solutions to forest destruction, presented in the form of payment for ecosystem services, multi-stakeholder initiatives, improved governance and transparency within a neo-liberal market framework, have had limited success. The reason for this limited success lies in the notion, encouraged by multilateral and development thinking, that commodification of communities and nature will also conserve forests. Drawing on fieldwork in Indonesia and the United States, this article argues that discrepancies in development and economic policy, which lead to ecologically destructive outcomes like tropical deforestation, cannot be patched up by innovative market tools. Rather, they reflect irreconcilable flaws in contemporary political economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines United States-Indonesian cooperation in the training of Indonesian teachers during the early decades of the Cold War. Indonesia badly needed teachers but the government's efforts to train new teachers were hampered by the tremendous lack of teachers who could train new teachers. The aid provided by the United States enabled the Indonesian government to send its prospective teachers to study in the United States and to have American educationists help develop teachers' colleges in Indonesia. How far did the decolonisation of teacher training and the making of a new education standard in postcolonial Indonesia reflect the conflicting ideological undertones and the US strategy of the Cold War? This paper argues that the US-Indonesian cooperation in teacher training marked a significant stage in the decolonisation of Indonesia. Yet, it also fostered the US cultural strategy of the Cold War in Southeast Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the nature of the education relationship between Indonesia and the US. The article examines two hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that transnational education constitutes a new type of imperialism by perpetuating knowledge dependency and financial dependency through the transfer of knowledge and foreign aid in education. Of particular interest will be the themes of ‘knowledge dependency’ and ‘financial dependency’. In contrast to the first hypothesis, the second holds that transnational education advances learning about and from other states, and has the potential to improve relationships, and promote international understanding. This article concludes that although the one-way transfer of knowledge from, and dependence on, foreign experts is evident, the Indonesian government has attempted to reduce dependence on foreign countries, whether that reliance was on knowledge or on finance. Although the Indonesia–US education relationship is politically motivated towards serving the interests of each, most respondents believed that any US political agendas were unacceptable. The experiences of both Indonesian and American respondents show that the relationship enhances and improves understanding between Indonesia and the US through academic exchanges and scientific and research links. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article explores on the deliberation of foreign policy between Indonesia and the U.S. Topics discussed include the transition of Muslim democracy to electoral democracy in the country, the economic condition of Indonesia with regard to religion and public life and the resilience of Indonesian nationalism.

The alliance between the United States and Australia (Australia New Zealand United States or ANZUS), while one of America's least problematic Asia-Pacific strategic relationships at present, could face a series of new challenges as structural change in this region continues apace. This article analyzes five such challenges facing ANZUS: the rise of China; changing American expectations of its allies and partners; the intensification of Australia-Japan security relations; the emergence of a divide between Australian public and elite opinion on ANZUS; and the rise of Indonesia. The article concludes by offering a series of policy-relevant recommendations designed to ameliorate the worst effects of these challenges. These include the generation of greater policy debate on ANZUS in Australia; the introduction of new public education programs highlighting the alliance's costs and risks; and the establishment of a new Australia-Indonesia-U.S. trilateral dialogue process at the second track or 1.5 track level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared with the United States' much-celebrated security collaboration with its more formal Asian allies, it is fair to say that its security cooperation with Indonesia is 'still under the radar.' Cooperation is limited not only by domestic pressure in the United States with regard to human rights issues, but also from Indonesia's perspective that U.S. policy consistency is often found wanting. Bilateral security relations appear to be relevant in the contemporary Southeast Asian security environment, given increasing tensions in the South China Sea and emerging challenges relating to counterterrorism. This relevance is qualified, however, by both countries' policymakers' tendencies to be intermittently detached-if not actually disinterested-in each other's core national security objectives. This article examines the development of Indonesia-U.S. defense and security relations, analyzing how Indonesia views U.S. presence in the region, and to what degree its own interests and policies benefit from or are complicated by security cooperation with the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science diplomacy supposedly builds international cooperation through scientific and technical exchange. In practice, however, there are important but often overlooked instances where it might create conflict instead – as with accusations of espionage surrounding the US Naval Medical Research Unit 2 (NAMRU-2) in Indonesia. Did American science diplomacy backfire in Indonesia and, if so, why? Most literature fails to anticipate this possibility, let alone explain it, since science diplomacy is rarely subject to critical analysis. Rather than shun politics or, similarly, simply blame the demise of NAMRU-2 on the military or avian influenza, I consider both the successes and failures of this research unit in the context of Indonesia’s transition to democracy and America’s legacy from the Cold War. Based on this history, I propose that the effects of science diplomacy depend on strategic communication and exchange, as well as elite influence and material incentives. Therefore, by challenging the conventional wisdom about science diplomacy, NAMRU-2 can help advance the theory and practice of this potentially useful tool of statecraft. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Since the mid-1990s, strategic partnerships have emerged as a new form of alignment between states, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. Yet only recently has the United States begun to pursue such relationships, especially under the Obama administration which has signed new partnerships with Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia and New Zealand. As a result, the current literature does not yet include significant study on how the United States views strategic partnerships. This article attempts to fill this gap by exploring the emergence of strategic partnerships as a new form of alignment in US strategy in the Asia Pacific under the Obama administration. Drawing on the existing literature on alignment, government documents, as well as conversations with policymakers from the United States and Southeast Asia, it argues that Washington is pursuing strategic partnerships as part of a deliberate effort to both enlist target countries to share the burden in addressing challenges and to institutionalize its relationships in the Asia Pacific. It constructs an original three-part analytical framework to understand how US policymakers conceive, craft and evaluate strategic partnerships in the Asia Pacific and applies it to analyse the similarities and differences in US partnerships with Indonesia and Vietnam. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights important lessons to draw from tragic implementation of U.S. foreign policy as in the case of the U.S. support during U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson's administration for Indonesia's massive anti-communist purge in 1965 that led to the removal of Indonesian President Kusno Sukarno from power and the death of countless people. One foreign policy lesson that came up in the aftermath of the purge is that the use of one sided and fear driven views as the basis of formulating policies toward a foreign country and its leader can bring tragic consequences to its people. Another lesson learned is that, in international diplomacy, sensitivity to local traditions and culture remain important.

A correction to the article "The Paradoxical Religiosity Effect: Religion and Politics in Indonesia and the United States" that was published on the August 18, 2015 issue is presented.