Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T21:06:12.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Democratizing Foreign-Policy Making in Indonesia and the Democratization of ASEAN: A Role Theory Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2016

Jürgen Rüland
Jürgen Rüland*
Affiliation:
Jürgen Rüland, Department of Political Science, University of Freiburg; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

With the resignation of President Soeharto in 1998 and subsequent democratization, Indonesia's foreign policy underwent major changes. More stakeholders than under Soeharto's New Order regime are now participating in foreign-policy making. The country seemed to make democracy promotion a hallmark of its foreign policy, especially under the presidency of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (2004–2014). This raises the questions of whether and, if so, to what extent Indonesian democratization changed the country's established foreign-policy role conceptions and how much impact Indonesia's democratization had on the democratization of regional governance. The paper seeks to answer these questions by developing a theoretical framework based on a constructivist version of role theory. On the basis of speeches held by Indonesian political leaders in the United Nations General Assembly and major domestic foreign-policy pronouncements, it documents changes in Indonesia's foreign-policy role concepts. It shows that, indeed, in the Era Reformasi, democracy became a major component in the country's foreign-policy role concept, although many elements of the role concept such as development orientation, Third Worldism, peace orientation, and a mediator's role remained constant. However, the litmus test for a democracy-oriented foreign policy, that is, the democratization of regional governance in Southeast Asia, remains ambiguous, and concrete policy initiatives often declaratory.

Keywords

IndonesiaASEANforeign policyrole theorydemocratization
Type
Articles
Information
TRaNS: Trans-Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia , Volume 5 , Special Issue 1: ASEAN communities , January 2017 , pp. 49 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © Institute for East Asian Studies, Sogang University 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acharya, Amitav. 2009. Whose Ideas Matter: Agency and Power in Asian Regionalism. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acharya, Amitav. 2014. Indonesia Matters: Asia's Emerging Democratic Power. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengtsson, Rikard and Elgström, Ole. 2012. Conflicting role conceptions? The European Union in global politics. Foreign Policy Analysis 8(1), 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borchers, Henning. 2013. Indonesia's national role conceptions: continuity amidst regional change (Unpublished masters thesis). Victoria University.Google Scholar
Bourchier, David. 1999. Positivism and romanticism in Indonesian legal thought. In Lindsey, Timothy (ed.), Indonesia: Law and Society, pp. 186–196. Sydney: The Federation Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, John and Uphoff, Norman T. 1980. Participation's place in rural development: seeking clarity through specificity. World Development 8(2), 213–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, Paul and Powell, Walter W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dosch, Jörn. 2007. The Changing Dynamics of Southeast Asian Politics. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Gaupp, Peter. 1983. Staaten als Rollenträger: Die Rollentheorie als Analyse-Instrument von Außenpolitik und internationalen Beziehungen. Frauenfeld: Verlag Huber.Google Scholar
Haacke, Jürgen. 2003. ASEAN's Diplomatic and Security Culture: Origins, Development and Prospects. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harnisch, Sebastian. 2011. Role theory: operationalization of key concepts. In Sebastian, Harnisch, Frank, Cornelia and Maull, Hanns (eds.), Role Theory in International Relations, pp. 7–15. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harnisch, Sebastian and Hanns, Maull. 2001. Germany – Still a Civilian Power? The Foreign Policy of the Berlin Republic. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Harnisch, Sebastian, Cornelia, Frank and Hanns, Maull (eds.). 2011. Role Theory in International Relations. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harnisch, Sebastian, Cornelia, Frank and Hanns, Maull. 2011. Conclusion: role theory, role change, and the international order. In Sebastian, Harnisch, Cornelia, Frank and Hanns, Maull (eds.), Role Theory in International Relations, pp. 252–261. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsti, Kalevi. 1970. National role conceptions in the study of foreign policy. International Studies Quarterly 14(3), 233–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirste, Knut and Maull, Hanns. 1996. Zivilmacht und Rollentheorie. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 3(2), 283–312.Google Scholar
Legro, Jeffrey. 2000. The transformation of policy ideas. American Journal of Political Science 44(3), 419–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leifer, Michael. 1983. Indonesia's Foreign Policy. London, Boston, Sydney: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Manners, Ian. 2002. Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms? Journal of Common Market Studies 40(2), 235–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maull, Hanns. 1990. Germany and Japan: the new civilian powers. Foreign Affairs 69(5), 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, Arndt. 2013. India's Foreign Policy and Regional Multilateralism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mietzner, Marcus. 2012. Indonesia's democratic stagnation: anti-reformist elites and resilient civil society. Democratization 19(2), 209–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modelski, George. 1964. Kautilya: foreign policy and international systems in the ancient Hindu world. American Political Science Review 58(3), 549–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nabbs-Keller, Greta. 2013. Reforming Indonesia's foreign ministry: ideas, organizations and leadership. Contemporary Southeast Asia 35(1), 56–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguitragool, Paruedee and Rüland, Jürgen. 2015. ASEAN as an Actor in International Fora: Reality, Potential and Constraints. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, Joseph. 1990. Soft power. Foreign Policy 80: 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raith, Michael. 2006. Der rot-grüne Beitrag zur Konfliktregulierung in Südosteuropa: eine rollen- und zivilmachttheoretische Untersuchung der deutschen Kosovo- und Mazedonienpolitik. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Reeve, David. 1985. Golkar of Indonesia: An Alternative to the Party System. Singapore, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Renshaw, Catherine. 2014. Human Rights and Regionalism in Southeast Asia (doctoral thesis). University of Sydney, Faculty of Law.Google Scholar
Rose, Richard. 1993. What is lesson-drawing? Journal of Public Policy 11(1), 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rother, Stefan. 2012. Wendt meets East: ASEAN cultures of conflict and cooperation. Cooperation and Conflict 47(1), 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rüland, Jürgen. 2009. Deepening ASEAN cooperation through democratization? The Indonesian legislature and foreign policy-making. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 9(3), 373–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rüland, Jürgen. 2013. ASEAN Citizens’ Rights: Rule of Law, Judiciary and Law Enforcement. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/studies.do?language=EN (accessed on 25 September 2013).Google Scholar
Rüland, Jürgen. 2014a. The limits of democratizing interest representation: ASEAN's regional corporatism and normative challenges. European Journal of International Relations 20(1), 237–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rüland, Jürgen. 2014b. Constructing regionalism domestically: local actors and foreign policy-making in newly democratized Indonesia. Foreign Policy Analysis 10(2), 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simanjuntak, Marsillam. 1989. Unsur Hegelian dalam Pandangan Negara Integralistik. Depok: Universitas Indonesia, Fakultas Hukum.Google Scholar
Tan, Hsien-Li. 2011. The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights: Institutionalising Human Rights in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiess, Cameron and Breuning, Marijke. 2012. Integrating foreign policy analysis and international relations through role theory. Foreign Policy Analysis 8(1), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Ralph. 1956. Role-taking, role standpoint, and reference group behavior. American Journal of Sociology 61, 316–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weatherbee, Donald. 2013. Indonesia in ASEAN. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinstein, Franklin. 1976. Indonesian Foreign Policy and the Dilemma of Dependence. From Sukarno to Suharto. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar