Indonesia-Malaysia Relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: the Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan Dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44

Home , Indonesians, Kesatuan Melayu Muda, Native Indonesians, Permesta

BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

INDONESIA-MALAYSIA RELATIONS IN THE POST-CONFRONTATION ERA: THE ROLE OF THE SERUMPUN CONCEPT

B.L.S. Wahyu Wardhani

The relationship between the Malay people, The Interaction Among the ‘Serumpun’ both from the mainland and archipelago, has People developed over many centuries, well be fore Indonesia and Malaysia formed as Literally, serumpun means the people of the independent countries. Relations, however, same racial or ethnic stock. The majority of have not always been smooth and the people of Indonesia originated from the cooperative but also conflictual and, to a same ethnic groups as the people of certain degree, rivalries have occured. Malaysia, called Malays (Melayu). This situation was not resolved when Historically, their ancestors were from these people, who originated from the same Yunnan, in the south of China. However, the stock, formed their own countries. origin of the term Melayu is still clouded in Interestingly, relations between the two uncertainty. The first mention of countries are fuelled by a ‘love -hate’ “Melayu/Melayur/Malayu” occurs in relationship. The special nature of the bond Chinese chronicles in AD 644 when it was can result in cooperation which is, for recorded that an emissary from Melayu in example, shown by their strong ten dency to the vicinity of the Jambi or Batang Hari make ASEAN work as a mechanism for river in Central Sumatra was present at the regional organization. On the other hand, Chinese imperial court. However, the term there are unresolved situations, such as a was never used as a term of ethnic identity reluctance to solve certain bilateral conflicts. until fairly recent times when European This article aims to present the travellers, merchants, missionaries and problems underlying the relationship since colonial officials began to categorise the the post-Confrontation era in a situation indigenous people living along the coastal where the ethnic dimension is still dominant estuaries and surrounding islands of in the relationship. peninsular Malaysia as ‘Malays’. Although The fact that the same ethnic stock the Malays themselves did not for a long and other similarities exist between the time refer to themselves as Malays, this does people of both countries nevertheless does not mean that they were not aware of their not always bestow advantages on the distinctiveness as a group. With the passage development of the relationship. This is of time, a Malay identity emerged. This because the ‘emotional’ dimension is often identity grew in tandem with an expanding involved and this has a deep influence on the ethnic mixture comprising Malay and others relationship, and sometimes it becomes a of the same racial stock such as the ’barrier’ to a valuable and effective Minangkabause, Acehnese, Bugis, partnership. Banjarese, Mandailings, and Javanese (Tham Seong Chee, 1992:1).

25 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

The interaction among Malay people little regard for frontiers in the modern has taken place from over a thousand years sense. Political boundaries have not been a ago through trade and religion. The feeling very substantial barrier to the movement of of sameness among them is a significant the various people throughout the region, factor in the relationship which has even during the last one hundred years conditioned perceptions and expectations (Mackie, 1974:60). and it is of contemporary significance. There The feeling of ‘oneness’ among are several factors which can represent the Malay people in Indonesia and Malaysia can significance of the relationship between be seen from the spirit of nationalism among Indonesia and Malaysia at present. Besides them. Mackie suggests that Indonesia’s sharing a high degree of cultural and ethnic quest for national independence made a similarities, both countries are powerful appeal to young Malays in Malaya geographically proximate, and share land in the last decade before the Second World and sea borders. The official languages of War and in the years of Indonesia’s the two countries are almost identical and revolutionary struggle against the Dutch Islam is the dominant religion of both between 1945-1949. Soekarno and Hatta countries which also share similar historical were regarded as national heroes in Malaya experiences. as well as in Indonesia and their photos were Several historical moments mark the displayed in many Malay and Bornean interaction between the Malay communities, households some years before independence both in Malaya and in Indonesia. Although (Mackie: 18). Indonesia declared its independence in 1945 The general sense of ‘oneness’ had and Malaya was granted independence by also been manipulated, sometimes Britain in 1957 and became Malaysia in exaggerated, for political reasons in both 1963, contact between the two communities countries, especially before and during can be traced back many centuries. Since the World War II. The notion of serumpun era of the Srivijaya Kingdom, for example, proved to be useful in mobilizing anti - Malay culture spread from Palembang, colonial sentiments and boosting a sense of where the Srivijaya Kingdom was located. solidarity and mutual help among the The Malay language was used by the p eople nationalist groups in both countries. For both on the peninsula and in other parts of instance, there was a strong impulse from Sumatra. Furthermore, throughout the the young Malayans and Indonesians for the Fifteenth Century, it is clear that the people growth of the idea of a closer union between of Aceh in the west and Ternate in the east Malaya and Indonesia. The Seruan Azhar, a adopted Melaka Malay’s style of monthly journal which was published by the government, literature, music, dance, dress, Association of Indonesia and Malay students games, titles, and even pantun after the in Cairo (which was originally called establishment of Melaka as a commercial Jami’ah Al-Khairiyah) made an appeal for and religious centre (Andaya and Andaya , the people of Sumatra, Java, and Borneo, 1982:54-5). Malays had lived for centuries and Malaya to “unite with one heart for in the region before the international progress and prosperity” (Roff, 1994:88 -9). boundaries were settled in the Nineteenth Another monthly journal, Pilehan Century; seafaring Malays, Buginese, Timur, centered on three main concepts: Sumatrans and Javanese roamed and settled Pan-Islamism, Pan-Malayanism (union at will throughout the archipelago and had between Indonesia and Malaya), and anti -

26 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. colonial nationalism. There were three Apart from Egypt, similar political organizations formed in Egypt organizations were formed by the endorsing the ‘oneness’ of the ‘two blood association of Indonesian and Malayan brothers’. The Kesatuan Melayu Muda students in Saudi Arabia called Persatuan (Union of Malay Youth: KKM), formed in Talabah Indonesia-Malaysia (Talabah 1937, was a radical nationalist and anti - Indonesia-Malaysia or Pertindom). In Iraq, British organization. The leaders, Ibrahim a similar organization was formed and called Yaacob and Ishak Haji Mohamed, presented Majelis Kebangsaan Indonesia-Malaya (The the concept “Melayu Raya” as being National Council of Indonesia-Malaya: synonymous with “Indonesia Raya” (Greater Makindom). Later, this organization was Malay[sia] and Greater Indonesia) based on transformed into Perkumpulan Pemuda a common history linked in continuity to a Indonesia (The Convention of Indonesian glorious past. Their dream was for the Youth: PPI), in which the youths from various groups of Bangsa Melayu in both Malaya regarded themselves as Indonesian the Dutch colonial territories and the Malay youths. The Malay Left formed Partai states in Malaya to be liberated from Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (Malaya’s colonial rule and merge into a sovereign Malay National Party: PKMM), in October state of one united bangsa (Omar, 1993:21). 1945. The PKMM held its inaugural The aspiration of the bangsa orang congress on 30 November and adopted eight Melayu is to struggle for the independence points, two relevant among them were: of the land and the bangsa Melayu who will  To unite the bangsa Melayu (Malay race) unite again in one great country according to and plant kebangsaan in the hearts of the the interest and desire of the people as a Malays with the aim of uniting Malaya in whole. The aim of Melayu Raya is the same a big family, that is the Republik Indonesia as Indonesia Raya which is the aspiration of Raya. the Malay nationalist movement, that is to  To work with other bangsa who live in the revive again the heritage of Sri Vijaya, country to live in peace and work towards which is the common unity of the bangsa. setting up the Malayan United Front to In 1938, Persatuan Melayu Selangor enable Malaya to be merdeka (Selangor Malay Association) was formed in (independent), prosperous, and peaceful as Kuala Lumpur. This organization proposed part of the Republik Indonesia Raya. to stop all “alien” immigration to the then Malaya but encouraged Indonesian The congress also adopted the immigrants because ‘the Indonesians come Indonesian flag, the Merah-Putih, as the from the same ethnic stock as the Malays’ PKMM’s banner and voiced its support for (Aris, 1977:79). Another organization the Malayan Union. Besides, PKMM also endeavoured to link Malaya’s future with adopted five principles which were very Indonesia’s and to declare joint similar to Indonesia’s principles of independence of the two nations; this was Pancasila. Kesatuan Ra’ayat Indonesia Semenanjong Undoubtedly, the plan for Indonesian (Union of Peninsular Indonesian: KRIS). independence and the realisation of The other organization was Persatuan “Indonesia Raya” was intended to include Pemuda Indonesia dan Malaya (The Malaya. After the Japanese offered the Association of Indonesia and Malay Youth prospect of independence and the or Perpindom) (Nasution, 1977:63). constitutional and political structure of the

27 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. new state came under discussi on, the But there is no indication that the idea of question whether Malaya and British Borneo merging Indonesia and Malaya was colonies should be included in the national considered again when Indonesia declared territory of Indonesia was debated in the its independence without the inclusion of Investigating Preparatory Committee for Malaya. However, the conception of Indonesia’s Independence ( Badan “Indonesia Raya” refound its momentum Penyelidik Usaha-usaha Kemerdekaan again after West Irian was successfully Indonesia: BPUPKI) on July 1945. The incorporated into Indonesian territory. The inclusion of the Malaya was put forward by ‘Konfrontasi’ policy was launched by Muhamad Yamin and Sukarno. Yamin’s Sukarno during 1962-1963. Initially, argument (Mackie:21) was simple that: Indonesia did not oppose the formation of the Malayan Federation; this was probably ... the areas which should be included in because Jakarta was still faced by the West Indonesian territory are those which are given Irian problem. However, Indonesia’s attitude birth to Indonesian people: the motherland of the people will be transformed into the changed after negotiations over West Irian territory of a State were successful and the Brunei revolt had occured. Indeed, the success of the The areas he listed as inhabited by confrontation style politics it had pursued Indonesians were the islands of Netherland with regards to the Netherlands’ control of Indies (including West New Guinea), Timor, West Irian, encouraged Indonesia to apply North Borneo, and Malaya (Mackie:21). In the same diplomatic style to Malaysia the BPUPKI meeting, Yamin argued that (Agung, 1990:445). Indonesia believ ed that Malaya bridged Indonesia, Indochina and Malaysia (and Singapore) could threaten its the Asian continent. The Malacca Straits and security since these two countries had the Malaya Peninsula are a passage to and supported the PRRI-PERMESTA the neck of the Indonesian archipelago. (Pemerintahan Revolusioner Republik Therefore, to separate Malaya from Indonesia: Revolutionary Government of Indonesia meant weakening Indonesia’s the Republic of Indonesia) rebellion of geo-political position and to unite them separatist movements against the Indonesian meant strengthening Indonesia’s position Government in 1957-1958 (Penders, and completing and entity with national 1974:176). aspirations and this was consistent with the Sukarno also opposed the formation interset of the geo-politics of land and sea of Malaysia because he saw the formation as (Dalton, 1972:122-123). Sukarno supported one manifestation of the ‘marriage between Yamin’s idea by saying: Malay feudalism and British imperialism’ (Leifer, 1983:80). Sukarno’s foreign policy … I myself am convinced that the people of doctrine was based on a militant -anti Malaya feel themselves as Indonesians, imperialist and anti-colonialist ideology belonging to Indonesia and as one of us ... known as ‘nekolim’ (neo-colonialism, Indonesia will not become strong and secure unless the whole Straits of Malacca are in our colonialism, and imperialism). The hands”. formation of Malaysia allegedly gave substance to Sukarno’s suspicions of the The members of KMM also persuaded their West’s motives in Southeast Asia. counterparts in the BPUPKI to put forward Confrontation was to lose its the “Greater Indonesia” concept to Sukarno. capacity to serve an important political

28 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. function when it was abandoned following Assembly). This institution consists of 15 the elimination of the PKI, the primary prominent leaders from both Indonesia and supporter, and the downgrading of Malaysia, and five leaders from Singapore. Sukarno’s role after the abortive coup This assmebly exists to promote business attempt in 1965 (Weinstein, 1969:12). opportunities among them and to explore the Despite the feeling of ‘oneness’, the possibilities for investment outside ASEAN. development of serious conflict, meant that (Republika Online, Sept. 9th 1996). A the relationship was marked by a “love - seminar was held on 12-13 September 1996 hate” tendency. Generally each perceives the in Jakarta with a theme of “Jaringan Melayu other in those terms and sometimes exhibits Antar-bangsa” (International Malay suspicion and distrust towards each other. Network). The participants decided to Mackie (1977:14) asserts: conduct cooperation in various areas, including transportation, trade, tourism and ... the very mixed feelings which Indonesians education. They resolved to establish and Malays have shown toward each other in Universitas Melayu Antar -bangsa the last decade - pride in their common Malay cultural heritage, yet at the same time (International Malay University) in mutual suspicions: admiration tinged with the Jogyakarta, Central Java. (Republika apprehension on the Malay side, disdain Online, Sept 11th, 1996) to institutional spiced with both envy and contempt on the form to their aspirations. Indonesian - are a complex amalgam derived Another method to promote Malay from both recent experience and folk - memories of the past which we find unity was to conduct an international embodied in their myths and legends. symposium on “Melayu Se-Dunia” (Malay Throughout the World), held on 23 -27 Confrontation had been a bitter September 1996 in Selangor, Malaysia. This experience for Malaysians and to some Malaysian-initiated symposium invited extent is considered a betrayal of a special Malay leaders from 16 countries and relationship by blood brothers across the discussed the promotion of Malay starits. Like any other kind of special economic progress and cultural relationship which sours, unfulfilled development. (Republika Online, Sept 24, expectations or dissatisfactions can cause 1996) The symposium was important to deep and long-lasting ill feelings. However, “promote the honor” of Malay peop le all before the Konfrontasi era, although the over the world and to correct the stereotypes need to stimulate the serumpun sentiment about Malay people (Republika Online, Sept was no longer as important as during the 23rd, 1996). The resurgence of the anti-colonial era, the presence of the widespread interest of the Malay people was sentiment was still considerably strong inspired by two strong desires, first, that the among the Malays in Malaysia. It is Malay people want to be “the mas ters of significant that, after Malaysia was formed, their own country” and to eradicate the Malays still celebrated the anniversary of image of Malay people as “coolies” among Indonesian independence (Abdullah, other nations in the world. Second, to a 1993:145). certain extent, the resurgence was also Recently, there have been some inspired by the idea of an “Islamic Revival”, attempts to redefine Malay identity as shown considering Islam is the Malay people’s by the formation of Majelis Usahawan dominant religion in both Indonesia and Serantau (Overseas Businessman Malaysia.

29 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur are established and a foreign service recruitment actively promoting the idea of Malay accelerated. Indonesian propaganda aimed at denigrating Malaysia as a ‘neo -colonial’ resurgence as these countries are the largest creation far from succeeding, has been Malay countries in the world. Their exposed and Malaysia’s reputation cooperation may contribute to the wealth of throughout the world correspondingly their people, especially, in terms of the enhanced. advent of the Pacific Century. Additionally, it is now time for Malay people to contribute When the first Non-Aligned significantly to the world economy as both Conference was held in September 1961 in Indonesia and Malaysia are predicted to Belgrade, Malaya remained indifferent to it, become “Asian Tigers” in the 21st Century. but Kuala Lumpur could not adopt the same attitude towards the second Non -Aligned Conference held in Cairo in October 1964. Post-Confrontation Era Malaysia could not make adequate diplomatic preparations to expect an Sukarno was being unreasonable when invitation, but Kuala Lumpur was afraid that Indonesia withdrew from the United Nations Indonesia would utilize this Conference to because of Malaysia’s membership of the create among the Non-Aligned Countries a Security Council. This cost Indonesia its false impression of Malaysia. This led the friends and Jakarta became isolated which Malaysian Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul led to a closer alignment with Chin a, its only Rahman, to write to all governments supporter in abandoning the UN. With participating in the Conference requesting China, Indonesia made a futile attempt to them to give his country a “fair hearing” organise a conference of the new emerging against possible Indonesian abuse. Malaysia forces that was to become the alternative to then became active in the Afro -Asian the “imperialist dominated” UN, but it never political world and it was accepted of a materialized. Indeed, the Confron tation member of the Non-Aligned countries group policy against the Malaysian Federation was in September 1970 at the Summit Meeting the darkest period in the history of Conference held in Lusaka. Furthermore, in Indonesian diplomacy. 1963, Indonesian diplomacy was very active For Malaysia, Confrontation brought in Africa and it protrayed its conflict with about a profound change in outlook on Malaysia as a struggle against neo - foreign policy. Indonesia’s attempt to isolate colonialism. In order to counter Indonesian Malaysia diplomatically and to discredit it in propaganda, Malaysia also initiated international fora led Malaysia to follow a diplomatic activities in Africa. Besides that, more vigorous foreign policy and it Malaysia associated itself intimately with established many new Embassies abroad. Islamic world. Though Islam is the official Describing the impact of the Confrontation religion in Malaysia, in the pre - episode on Malaysian foreign policy, the Confrontation era Kuala Lumpur took little Malaysian Secretary for Foreign Affairs interest in Islamic affairs. The Malaysian (Bhattacharjee, 1977:190) stated: King’s goodwill visit to some Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the However Confrontation by a big neighbour United Arab Republic and Jordan, in 1963 provided a stimulus to foreign contributed much to integrating Malaysia policy. For example, several new diplomatic with the Islamic world. Confrontation also missions in Africa and Asia have been brought Malaysia closer to the United State s

30 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. which could be relied upon for support Indonesia’s relation with Malaysia took a against communist aggression. Washington different form from those of the previous provided military training for Malaysian era. According to Donald K. Emmerson, personnel and considered appropriate Suharto’s decision to abandon Sukarno’s military equipment for the defence of campaign against Malaysia was rational not Malaysia. In addition, the role of the only because it facilitated the achievement People’s Republic of China during the of regional peace, but regional peace itself Confrontation period naturally intensified was a rational objective (Jackson, 1986:93). Malaysia’s feelings of hostility toward Suharto’s foreign policy was seen as being Beijing. Tunku Abdul Rahman argued that subordinated to Indonesia’s national “the whole Confrontation by Indonesia is development and has been confined largerly communist-inspired”; in 1966, he again said to the immediate region. A major goal was that ASA “would serve as a bulwark against improving relations with Indonesi a’s any effort of Communist China”. The neighbours by terminating konfrontasi and hallmarks of Malaysian foreign policy signing agreements on land and sea borders during the Tunku’s era can be instantly with most of Indonesia’s neighbours. The classified as being pro-Western and anti- second major foreign policy initiative was to communist on the global stage. When Tunku engage Indonesia in a regional structure, Abdul Razak assumed the Prime ASEAN, in order to regain the confide nce of Ministership, Malaysia became even more its neighbours. The stability of the actively involved in regional and immediate region is regarded as a international affairs (Pathmanathan, prerequisite for the success of Indonesia’s 1984:38). national development efforts. The New In the post-Confrontation era, the Order leaders, especially the Army. also nature of Southeast Asian politics was believed that regional cooperation would radically changed. This was mainly due to contribute directly to Indonesia’s domestic mainly three basic factors. First, Indonesia political security and economic development abandoned the militant foreign policy of since such cooperation would help create a Sukarno and the main objective of foreign stable and non-threatening regional policy in the New Order has been achieving environment. Indonesia’s participation in economic development as rapidly as regional organization would ensure that possible. Second, the British withdrawal neighbouring countries remained friendly to from ‘East of Suez’ led Malaysia to co nsider Jakarta (Anwar, 1994:46), so that Indonesia the defence problem against its regional would be safe from interference by background which meant that its security neighbouring countries, such as was the case now become integrally related to the of PRRI-PERMESTA. The creation of a security of Southeast Asia as a whole. Third, friendly environment meant moving the the withdrawal of the US after the Vietnam danger zone away from Indonesia’ s War forced all powers in Southeast Asia to perimeter whilst the removal of immediate reconsider their policy toward the People’s external threats would contribute to Republic of China. These circumstances domestic and economic development. have brought a diplomatic and security The outlook of the New Order under revolution to Southeast Asia. Suharto leadership has had three key In the light of such changes, aspects, namely strong anti-communism, a entering the post-Confrontation period, commitment to stability and economic

31 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. development, and a pragmatic international highlighted the differences in many ways; outlook. The New Order leaders saw several one important difference is the changing benefits to Indonesia actively participating perceptions of the serumpun concept. The in regional cooperation immediately after Indonesia Raya or Melayu Raya concept Confrontation. Uppermost was the urgent which once desired to unite Indonesia and need to restore Indonesia’s credibility, both Malaysia in a single country was considered in the region and in the wider international unviable. The Malay advocates of the community. Regional cooperation was concept interpreted it in purely racial terms, firstly intended to exorcise the “ghost” of while Sukarno and Yamin saw it in Confrontation . It was not enough just to end geopolitical terms. The main reason for the Confrontation, this was only the beginning difference in perception was that in of a more positive and active foreign policy Malaysia this idea was the product of racial in the region. Indonesia needed to provide anxiety, while in Indonesia it was an further proof that it was really committed to extension of the nationalist attempts to build a good neighbourhood foreign policy. a multi-ethnic unity. Indonesia had to show enthusiasm for There has been a recent development regional cooperation otherwise its sinceity which shows the dissimilarity in each towards neighbouring countries would be in nation’s perception toward the serumpun doubt. concept. The differences in perception Ideas for the establishment of a new happen not only at the macro level but also regional association emerged as direct at the micro level. The variations of and the normalization talks in Bangkok began in reasons for the changes are many. The April and May 1966. The three Foreign generation gap is the common determining Ministers, Adam Malik, Tun Abdul Razak, factor which contributes to the difference and Thanat Khoman, agreed that closer and is complicated by the recent economic, regional cooperation was necessary to social, and political realities which currently prevent the recurrence of Confrontation prevail in both countries. The previous between countries in the region. ASEAN generation emphasised the similarities was finally established with the signing of between them based on emotions and the ASEAN Declaration in Bangkok on 8 abstract notions such as ethnicity, language, August 1967. In this Declaration the Foreign religion, culture and history. These notions Ministers of member countries agreed on served intended purposes from time to time several general major points to improve (pre and during World War) by the older intra-regional cooperation and work toward generation, but such abstract nations seems the creation of regional stability. to be less relevant for the younger generation. This is partly because of the less historical orientation among them, the lack Changing perceptions of the Serumpun of meaningful interaction between concept counterparts and the lack of relevant knowledge and interest in each other’s Indonesia and Malaysia have developed as country. independent and sovereign states and Malaysia adopts the policy of adopted different policies and strategies to multiculturalism and uses the term bangsa achieve their national goals. The specific (nation) which follows that what it means by conditions of the two countries have serumpun can only be applied to the bangsa

32 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Melayu (Malay people) who constitute only numerous others. It is inconceivable that the a part of the whole Malaysian population. Indonesians were advocating serumpun as The Malays consider themselves as this concept has strong racial undertones. In bumiputra (literally means “the sons of the Indonesia, the Malays are only one of many soil”) and enjoy a privileged position in the ethnic groups. The unity of the various political life of the country. Because of that, ethnic groups is an Indonesian unity, one in the Malaysian Federation was not based on which all groups could feel an affinity. In any sentiment of Malaysian nationalism. addition, Malaysians emphasize the The racial division constitutes the basic superiority of the bumiputra in politics, problem of Malaysian nation building. economics, and socio-cultural areas, Different from Malaysia, Indonesia whereas in Indonesia, although Javanese are is strongly tied to the philosophy of still dominant and national integration still a “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika” (unity in diversity) crucial problem, the government doe s not instead of serumpun. Unity here was meant allocate superioroty to a specific ethnic to express the popular desire of a nati onal group, for instance by propagating an unitary state, whereas diversity refers to the identity based on Javanism. The use of plurality of ethnic groups from more than bahasa Indonesia as the national language 13,000 diverse large and small islands in the as the national language was designed to Indonesian archipelago. The country-wide avoid conflict caused by domination of the desire for unity was strongly felt and Javanese. nurtured, particularly in the anti -colonial Second, there is the question of movements by political organizations, long Islam. In Malaysia, a Malay is almost before the founding fathers of the Republic certainly a Moslem; ‘Malay’ is identical to of Indonesia were in position to give reality ‘Moslem’. Islam is the official state religion to the goals. In October 1928, a National although less than fifty percent of the Youth Congress was held in Jakarta which Malaysian population are Moslems. Unlike unanimously adopted the resoluti on for the Malaysia, Indonesia has no official relogion formation of “One Nation, One Fatherland, even though more than seventy-five of its and One National Language”, later known population are Moslems and Islam as Sumpah Pemuda (Youths’ Pledge). obviously has played an important role in There are at least two reasons why Indonesian political and social life. Islam is Indonesia adopts the Bhinneka Tunggal Ika not identical to Malay because it does not philosophy. The first concerns the variation refer to a specific ethnic group. In fact, of Indonesia’s ethnic groups. There are more many of Malay stock are non-Moslem. On than 150 ethnic groups spread from Sabang the rejection on a ‘national state’ based on in north Sumatra to Merauke in Irian Jaya Islam, in January 1953 Sukarno (Brown, and these speak different ethnic languages. 1994:123) stated: But Indonesia has adopted bahasa Indonesia (Indonesia language) as the If we establish a state based on Islam, many official and unified language, although areas whose population is not Islamic such as the Moluccas, Bali, Flores, Timor, the kai ethnic languages are still used in daily and Islands, and Sulawesi, will secede. And informal conversation. Although of mainly West Irian, which has not yet become part of Malay stock, there are several other non - the territory of Indonesia, will not want to be Malay groups, such as Manadonese, part of the Republic. Irianese, Ambonese, Timorese, and

33 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Indonesian nationalism embraces all aspects legislation to institutionalize the ‘special of Indonesian communities, culturally, position of the Malays’ enshrined in the ethnically and linguistically. Leo Constitution. The constitutional definition of Suryadinata (1988:113) has noted: ‘Malay’ contained in Article 160 (2) provides that a person is considered to be a ... the indigenous minority groups are not Malay if he habitually speaks the Malay expected to be absorbed into Javanese language, adopts the malay costume and is a society. The Indonesian national culture is seen as a new culture based on various Muslim. The major focus of these efforts indigenous ethnic cultures, of which bahasa had been on the issue of language. The Indonesia is the major vehicle. Islam is part dominant unifying argument was that of the culture, but not the dominant one ... education offered the key to upward socio - the minority groups are tolerated/encouraged economic mobility, and that once Malay to retain their ethnic cultures provided that they accept the authority of the national became the language of education and government and national education. administration, the Malay commuity as a whole would benefit and its ‘special It is true that both in Indonesia and position’ vis a vis the non-Malay speakers Malaysia there is a distinction between would be assured. The Islamic element in indigenous and non-indigenous groups, the state ideology is designed to rally the which is expressed by the terms Malay community behind UMNO by pribumi/non-pribumi and bumiputra/non- strengthening the bumiputra myth. As bumiputra respectively, and refers to mainly Brown asserts, because of this, there are Chinese and other ethnic groups. However, clear tensions between the attempts by the there is a difference policy and attitude Malays to employ Islam as a tool to toward the non-indigenous comminity in facilitate their own upward mobility into the Indonesia and Malaysia. In Indonesia, a dominant class and the attempts by poor memeber of non-indigenous people began Malay peaseants to oppose th at class to refer themselves as “Indonesians”, hence through the same medium of Islam, and the indigenous people gradually abandoned this employment of Islam by the dominant class term in favour of the more exclusive itself as a Malay unifying myth and as a “Indonesia asli” (native Indonesians). The state ideology. term was introduced into the 1945 Politics and attitudes regarding Constitution, so that there would no pribumi and bumiputra are justified in institutionalization of special rights for different way in Indonesia and Malaysia. As indigenous citizens, and it was states “all Shiddique and Suryadinata conclude, in citizens have the same position in law and Malaysia the dichotomy continues in terms government”. Since the 1958 citizenship law of the overall goal of achieving national adopted the jus soli principle, many non- unity, but in Indonesia pribumi policies are indigenous Indonesians become eligible for more narrowly justified as being necessary Indonesian citizenship (Shiddique and for the stability of the political system. Suryadinata, 1982:670-672). Indonesia tends to take a more In Malaysia, on the other hand, a assimilationist/absorptionist views towards distinction between bumiputra and non- the long-term solution of Chinese minority bumiputra gained prominence as a unifying problems, whereas in Malaysia the solution myth in the post-independence period when is generally seen in terms of accomodation. UMNO leaders were trying to frame In addition, in Indonesia the general lac k of

34 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. response can be attributed to the fact that the have never completly been solved on the pribumi policy has yet to make a significant basis of candid attitudes and discussions impact on non-pribumi life and they are only (Kompas, July 5th, 1991). a small percentage, so they do not constitute In another context, the spirit of a formidable political force. It is different in serumpun has been misused and abused. Malaysia, where the Chinese community This is clear from the use of that spirit as a constitutes more than a third of Malaysian “coercive tool”. For example, Datuk Najib population and increasingly feels threatened Tun Razak, the former Malaysian Minister by current government bumiputra policies. for Sports, said in Dialog Malindo II, that Referring back to the serumpun the serumpun and brotherhood relations are concept, the younger generation, especially useless if the Proton Saga cars, which are those who are Indonesians, approach the Malaysian made, could not enter the concept with different attitudes than their Indonesian market. He also asked why Malaysian counterparts. Abdullah gives an Indonesia limited the landing rights of example of such differences in a magazine Malaysian Airlines to Jakarta to only four article reporting on a conference called times a week whereas Singapore Airlines Dialog Malindo (Malaysia-Indonesia Youth could land four times a day. Moreover, Dialogue) held in Malacca in Dec ember Indonesia had maintained that the serumpun 1988. During the three day conference, most brotherhood was also useless if the participants from Malaysia made no effort to Malaysian High Court handed down a death hide their attachment to the serumpun sentence on Basri Masse, an Indonesian who concept, which in a way was also meant as a was found guilty of smuggling dangerous hospitable gesture to welcome “brother drugs into Malaysia. The Indonesians felt participants” from the serumpun nation. On that the sentence was too harsh and appealed that occasion, the Malaysian wanted to to a lighter one. All of these incidents emphasize their close relationship so that the indicate the importance of re-examining and Indonesian participants would truly feel at re-evaluating the serumpun concept. home. Indeed, among the objectives of the conference was to wish to restimulate the serumpun spirit among the younger Maritime Borders, EEZ and Archipelagic generations so that both nations will be more Principles cooperative. However, the Indonesian participants seems to demonstrate a lack of The conflict over maritime borders between empathy and regarded such an enthusiasm as Indonesia and Malaysia occured as a result “an obsession” of Malay youths and a of lack of agreement by some of the major manifestation of racial politics practiced in maritime powers over the UN Conference Malaysia. on the Law of the Sea in May 1982. The serumpun approach, in fact, has Indonesia and Malaysia (and Singapore) are been an indication of unhealthy relations the states immediately concerned with the between Indonesia and Malaysia. The satus of the Straits of Malacca; how ever, adoption of such an approach in the two these countries have different views on this countries’ relationship as a model of subject. As an archipelagic state, Indonesia diplomacy has aggravated the dissatisfaction regards the straits as internal waters where in the relationship. This suggests that the its sovereignty is supreme and free passage a problems which have occured between them concession (Indorf, 1984:20). Malaysia, on

35 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. the other hand, is more concerned with Anambas and Natuna Islands in its navigational safety and marine pollution, but territorial boundaries. This means that concedes the right of innocent passage Indonesia’s boundaries are interposed through territorial waters. To solve the between West and East Malaysia. differences, the two governments signed a Indonesia’s claims have a traditional Treaty of Friendship and Delimitation of foundation, based upon its concepts of Territorial Seas Treaty regarding the Straits fatherland (tanah air) and the strategic need of Malacca in 1970. Indonesia had declared to ensure the integral unity of its 13,000 a 12-mile territorial sea limit in 1957 which islands and connecting waterways. became law in 1960. Malaysia had already Regarding these matters, Indonesia and done the same thing in 1969. As the result of Malaysia concluded a bilateral agreement as these Declarations, the Straits of Malacca of a formal recognition of Malays ia’s less than 24 miles was made a territorial sea traditional fishing rights. These rights of Indonesia and Malaysia. The 1970 Treaty pertain within Indonesia’s archipelagic contains a non-agression pact. Article 3 waters off Anambas Island. It took nineteen states that: (Djalal, 1985:63) years of hard bargaining before the two countries signed a Memorandum of The two High Contacting Parties undertake Understanding in 1976. By recognizing that in case any dispute on matters directly Indonesia’s sovereignty over areas of the affecting them should arise they will not resort to the threat or use of force and shall South China Sea, Malaysia is granted free at all times endeavour to settle such a passage for its naval and merchant vessels, dispute through the usual diplomatic customary rights for fishing activities, and channels in true spirit of friendship and the laying of submarine cables and pipelines goodwill between two neighbours. and marine research. Thus, on the national unity issue, Indonesia guarantees Malaysia that the Sipadan and Ligitan Islands application of the Indonesian archipelagic principles in the South China Sea will not The conflict over these islands (which are affect Malaysian national unity and political located in the Straits of Sulawesi, between stability, especially between West Malaysia Sabah and East Kalimantan) has recently (Malayan Peninsula) and East Malaysia become a sensitive issue in the relationship (Sabah and Sarawak). This guarantee was between Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur. already formulated and incorporated in the Documents confirming who owns the Law of the Sea Convention. islands are not clear on the point. Both In 1960, on the basis of 1957 Juanda Indonesia and Malaysia claim ownership Declaration, Indonesia officially applied its because each holds different versions of archipelagic baselines which conform to the maps inherited from the colonial powers. rules in the Convention on the Law of the Indonesia holds the Dutch-version and Sea. (Valencia and Danusaputro, 1984:462). Malaysia holds the British-version maps. As a result, Indonesia has incorpotrated in The islands then become an ov erlapping its national jurisdiction an area of 999,000 zone on the two countries’ boundaries. square nautical miles. This comprises one Indonesia adopts “the natural line of and a half times the land mass of the whole astronomical reflection” (garis petunjuk of ASEAN combined. Indonesia’s alam pantulan astronomi) whereas Malaysia archipelagic principles have incorporated

36 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. adopts “the river indication” ( petunjuk Bill Gleason and published by Malaysia aliran sungai). In this regard, Indonesia has Underwater Adventure Tours and the claimed that the current of the river has Malaysia Airlines System. The brochure changed and shifted thereby entering says that the island is the only Malaysian Indonesian territory. island located in the centre of the ocean. It is The ownership of these islands was generally agreed that the underwater scenery discussed in the talks about the is one of the five most beautiful diving sites determination of the continental shelf in the world. From this activity, Malaysia boundary (batas landas kontinen) between earns as much as US$ 304,000 per month Indonesia and Malaysia in Kuala Lumpur in (Suara Pembaruan, June 4th, 1991). 1969. However, there was no written Indonesia has warned Malaysia not agreement reached, and thus the two to continue any further development in the countries decided that the islands be given Sipadan and Ligitan islands because of their the “status quo” position which means that status quo position. Indonesian officials legal position of the islands is not to be suggests the development of tourist resorts tinkered with by both countries while trying (given the status quo position of the islands) to solve the problem with the brotherhood is both provocative and unethical. ( Pelita, spirit. The status quo position was June 20, 1991). By developing Sipadan and reaffirmed in 1986 and confirmed during Ligitan islands, Malaysia has changed the the visit of Malaysian Prime Minister, position of the islands from the status quo to Mahathir Mohammad, to Yogyakarta in a fait accompli situation. The change of 1988 to meet President Suharto. It was also attitude has been made clear by the satement reaffirmed again during the visit of Suharto of the Secretary of the Development to Kuala Lumpur for the G-15 Summit Ministry of the Sabah State Government that Meeting in 1990 (Suara Pembaruan, Feb. “there is no doubt that Sipadan is a part of 20th, 1991). Malaysian territory” (Suara Pembaruan, In 1980 the Malaysian Government June 24th, 1991). Furthermore, he states that had published its national new map which the state government has a long-term plan to included Sipadan and Ligitan islands a s promote Sipadan island as a “marine integral part of the Malaysian Federation. garden”, but has been delayed because On the other hand, according to Daftar Sabah is mindful of the Indonesian Nama Pulau di Indonesia (the List of the Government’s wishes. Yet, an Indonesian Indonesian Islands), those islands belong to diplomat in Kuala Lumpur has stated: Indonesia. The problem become more sensitive and critical when a report said that if they were really thoughful of the the State of Sabah has developed the Indonesian Government, they should stop the development of tourist accomodation until disputed island of Sipadan as a tourist resort. the status of the island is clear ( Suara Indonesia argues that tourism activities on Pembaruan, June 24th, 1991). Sipadan island indicate that Malaysia does not respect of the status quo position of the Indonesian diplomatic circles suspect the island. It was reported that there are alr eady Malaysian Government has used delaying 19 motels built and managed there by the tactics to frustate a solution to the problem. Borneo Divers Company. There are also a This is to earn as much revenues as possible brochure titled “Sipadan Island, Borneo, from the investment (Kompas, July 26th, Malaysia” with the text and photography by 1991).

37 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Illegal Immigrants only Rp. 500-1,000 in Lombok. Remittances reaching Lombok through the BNI 1946 Malaysia presently faces serious problems State Bank in Mataram, total 200 million a of illegal immigration. Many of them are month, although this has had only limited from Indonesia, as evident by their presence impact on the national economy ( FEER, in town centres and plantation or estates and January 11th., 1990:21) by the large numbers of them who have been Malayasia’s similarity in cultural deported by the authorities. Historically, heritage, language and religion has further migration between the two countries was encouraged migration. The relatively cl ose common and enshrined in Malay myths and distance between Indonesia and Malaysia is legends. However, in the post-independence another encouraging factor. Hence, illegal era, immigration from Indonesia, as well as immigrants without proper documents, when from other countries, has been restricted by caught are deported but usually find it the Malaysian Government in an attempt to relatively easy to slip back to Malaysia. control population growth. In the mid-1970s the implementation The flow of labourers who come of Malaysia’s New Economic Policy (NEP) from Indonesia illegally to Malaysia has gained its momentum; this was a recently become one of the significant issues momentous pull factor from Malaysia. In in the Indonesia-Malaysia relationship. It response to the NEP, sizeble portions of affects not only social and economic Malay youths from the rural areas moved to development but also aggravates political, urban areas which caused acute labour security, religious, and cultural problems shortages in the agricultural sector. To and, for both governments, these pressures maintain commodities exports --especially are sensitive issues. rubber and palm-oil which contribute 17.7% There are several problems due to of Malaysia’s export earnings -- the the massive flow of illegal immigrants. It government was forced to concede to can be explained by push factors from plantation owners’ demands to allow them Indonesia and pull factors from Malaysia. to make up their shortages with imported Shrinking employment opportunities in labour (FEER, April 26th, 1984). Indonesia are the main push factor. Workers, However, the situation soon get out especially skilled and semi-skilled try to find of control when illegal immigrants flooded jobs in other countries such as Saudi Arabia, into Malaysia in 1980s. Concerned about the Brunei and Malaysia. Finding a job overseas situation in both countries, the two means remittances are sent home. Workers governments signed a bilateral agreement in can receive much higher wages com pared to Medan, North Sumatra in 1984. Under the what they can earn at home, although in agreement, a committee was set up to handle Malaysia they cannot get the same amount the “recruitment of Indonesian workers”. as their local counterparts. The Indonesians Article 3 of the agreement stipulates: accept the wage discrimination because it is “Indonesia agrees to supply to Malaysia still more they can earn at home. For such numbers and categories of workers as example, compared to an average dail y may, from time to time, be requested by wage in Lombok, one of the porrest Malaysia.” Based on the amount and type of provinces and one of the biggest sources of labour needed by Malaysia, the Indonesian labourers to Malaysia, a palm-oil plantation Manpower Ministry would recruit workers worker gets Rp. 7,000-8,000 compared to and facilitate their entry into Malaysia by

38 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. providing them with proper documents and without any proper health scrutiny, the exempting them from exit taxes. By t his, health risk is exacerbated in the congested both countries hoped not only to curb illegal areas where they live and contagious immigrants but also to keep track of diseases spread to the local populations. In immigrant workers and protect them against addition, their influx into certain exploitation by Malaysian employers. “squattered” areas has reduced the original Nevertheless, this agreement has not stopped residents to be a minority and, at the same the influx of illegal entries. The biggest time, has worsened the standards of living stumbling block to this scheme is found in bacause the rapid growth of the squatter Jakarta which imposes an exit tax on all community is not commensurate with the Indonesians leaving the country; this increase in basic social amenities. The discourages workers from seeking work in Malaysian public reactions to the Malaysia through official channels. unwelcome guests are various. From the The unwelcome guests add to the economic perspective, the trade union are present sensitivity in the Indonesia-Malaysia resentful of them, as the influx of relationship. Local resentment against Indonesians is seen as a threat to local Indonesians has built up over the years. labour. The Indonesians are used to lower They are held responsible for rising urban wages without the fringe benefits normally crime rates; Malaysians read almost daily of accorded to local labourers. Being illegal robbers who “spoke with Indonesian and unfamiliar with local conditions, t he accents” (Asiaweek, November 27th., Indonesians make subservient workers; they 1981:12) It was reported that Indonesians can easily be manipulated and exploited, are involved in crimes such as robbery, rape hence, the employers’ preference for and murder in Chow Kit and surrounding Indonesian workers vis-a-vis the local areas. The local press has created a bad (Kasim, 1987:265-267). However, the image of Indonesians by printing news Indonesian workers can be dismissed easily discrediting Indonesians and they seldom when the employers no longer need their highlight positive things about Indonesia. services. Sulaiman Muhammad, the youth chairman From the political point of view, the of UMNO, comments that illegal reaction is also influenced by the ethnic immigrants are falsely treated as identical group factor but this is changing over time. with Indonesians, as if all crimes were In the early years of their presence, the committed by Indonesians. It is true that immigrants were “silently welcomed’ by the some Indonesians are involved in criminal ethnic Malays from the main component of actions but compared to the total number of the bumiputra; the immigrants were such actions, crimes by Indonesians are not perceived as bangsa serumpun who would a sizeable portion. In an action to detain eventually assimilate with the local such criminals and lessen the impact of bumiputra (Abdullah, 1983:185). illegal immigrants, the government launched Nonetheless, the influx of Indonesians is Opearsi Seberang (Across the Border suspected by non-Malays as an attempt by Opration) in the mid 1980s, and Operasi the Malay-dominated government to Nyah II (Go Away Operation). increase the demographic strength of the Another problem created by the Malays and with it, political strength. illegal immigrants is health and settlement. Because Indonesia and Malaysia are Abdullah suggests, as they enter the country culturally and socially similar, Indonesians

39 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. can be easily assimilated into Malay society is especially true for the Maduras and the as in the case of earlier Indonesians. The Boyans, but exceptional to Minangka baus Democratic Action Party, the Chinese - (Kasim, 1987:276) dominated party, alleged that some The issue of illegal immigrants is Indonesians are already being given blue multidimensional and it seems this will identity cards which means granting them remain a significant and sensitive issue in citizenship which enables them to vote in the relationship between the two countries general elections. Thus, in the long run, the for some time to come. Indonesians immigrants are regarded as having strengthened the Malays’ electoral power. This assumptions was reinforced by Conclusion a Deputy Minister of UMNO who stated: The governments of Indonesia and Malaysia It is true that today the Indonesian have tried seriously to improve their immigrants do not contribute anything relationship on the basis of cooperation and towards UMNO. But it would be different after they stay in this country for ten years mutual benefit for almost three decades. In and are allowed to apply to citizenship and ASEAN, Indonesia and Malaysia agreed to therby become voters. Even their “bury” the confrontational era and began the offspringsings in this country will new phase in the relationship. Ho wever, automatically become Malaysian citizens relations are not always cordial and have (Tempo, January, 1987) been uneasy because there are still some There are also socio-cultural unresolved problems. The two countries’ diplomatic manoevres and foreign policies problems associated with the immigrants. It still reflect sensitivities in their relationship. was reported that some of the Indonesian As developing nations, Indonesia and illegal immigrants were Christians and there Malaysia feel the need for a wider were those who tried to establish churches international forum, and therefore, each of and some were alleged to have spread their manoevres, to a certain degree, Christianity among Malays. The Malays, conceals their rivalry in seeking to play the who are generally orthodox about their leading role in certain issues. For instance, religion, took it as a sensitive issue and a Indonesia has shown its interest in becomi ng serious offence. The President of UMNO a leader of the Non-Aligned Movement by youth, Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak, nominating itself as organiser of the Summit considered it as the “biggest threat facing Conference, while Malaysia is anxious to Muslims in Malaysia t - oday” (Abdullah:177 become a leader in the South -South 178). Dialogue. The concentration of Indonesians of Indonesian political relations with different ethnic groups within a confined Malaysia may be called a commonality of geographical area has led to stiff family relationships. The former Malaysian competition between them and Malays for Foreign Minister, Tunku Ahmad limited resources, especially jobs and housing. This had led to jealousy, en mity, Rithaudden, claims that “relations between Malaysia and Indonesia have been very quarrels and fights between them. Moreover, Malays also complain that Indonesians lack special”. On the one hand, these relations show intimacy, but, on the other hand they a ‘sense of proprierty’ when it comes to disguise many complex problems which are dressing and male-female interactions. This

40 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. difficult to solve. Sutopo stresses the fact involve borders and illegal immigrants. that, as Indonesia is located in the same Even though in general the two countries geographic area as Malaysia, this makes it have been able to settle their border disputes difficult to understand Indonesia’s relations on land and sea, some problems which have with Malaysia by only referring to the not been solved, can hopefully b e settled ‘rational’ aspects of interrelationship. appropriately. These problems, continue to Geographic, economic, and cultural ties generate a certain hidden reluctancy emotionally influence Indonesia’s political between the two countries. This feeling is relations with Malaysia. based on the belief that they are one of Being neighbours, Indonesia and family, of one stock and should be able to Malaysia have rationally sought to fix the settle all problems in a favourable wa y. But boundaries of each country’s internal the failure to resolve the status of the sovereignty. Defence officials from both Sipadan and Ligitan islands, however, which countries stress that no other ASEAN in some circles is considered futile and member countries share a longer border than should not shake the foundation of that between Malaysia and Indonesia in Indonesian-Malaysian friendship, Borneo, or holds strategic positions such as demonstrates the “awkwardness” in settling the grip on the Straits of Malacca or control this problem which is supported by the of secondary passages such as the Lombok principle of commonality. This actual and Flores Straits. As far as internal impasse is a mixture of the problem problems are involved, the principle of not inherited from the colonial period and the interfering in the affairs of each country has anxiety of the past experience and cultural been kept and maintained as far as possible. psychology created through the relations of At the bottom line of the defence a larger country (Indonesia) with a smaller cooperation lies one basic tenet: both want a one (Malaysia). reliable partner on the other side of From the perceptual point of view, ASEAN’ s longest frontier and each sees the Malaysia, which in general considers other’s stability as crucial to its own. Indonesia as its ‘big brother’, hides a feeling Jakarta makes no effort to hide its need for of fear that it might be dominated, if not Malaysia as a “buffer state” between itself threathened, as an older sibling sometimes and Indochina, and an even more distant does to a younger one. As far as this family perceived threat from China and Jakarta relationship is concerned, there is a strong quietly supported Malaysia’s defence ties desire that the bond is encouraged to be a with the West during the Cold-War era. At more rational, a business-like relationship. If the official level, relations between this kind of relationship is to be achieved, Indonesia and Malaysia appear to be very both countries need to look for a new good and no urgent problems seem to be approach for managing future relations. waiting to erupt. History and geopolitics have brought Emotionally, Indonesia’s relations Indonesia and Malaysia to the present state with Malaysia conceals an anxiety emerging of their relationship. The formal relationship from actual and perceptual factors. In which has been forged since the two reality, the existence of the unresolved countries became independent is now problems between them make this developing in more complex ways as the relationship often seem very clumsy.i The emotional aspects are much deeper, as current problems which are most noticeable

41 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44. shown by some cases mentioned in this (Columbia: Southeast Asian Books, essay. 1977). If the two countries seriously want a more valuable relationship, then a new form Brown, David, The State and Ethnic Politics is needed so that the positive aspects can be in Southeast Asia (London: Routledge, maximized and the negative sides 1994). minimized. The change in the generations might facilitate this process as the younger Damian, Eddy and Budiono Kusumo - generation seems to be more pragmatic and hamidjoyo, in Mochtar Kusuma - wants the relationship to be based on a atmadja’s collection of speech of rational basis. Differences between them, Politik Luar Negeri Indonesia dan which are normal in the context of b ilateral Pelaksanaannya Dewasa Ini relations, should not be a barrier to a (Bandung: Alumni, 1983). balanced relationship. Indonesia-Malaysia bilateral rela- Ide Agung Anak Gde Agung, Twenty Years tions should now be reaching a new phase, Indonesian Foreign Policy 1945 - one which produces more substance and 1965 (Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana University Press, 1990). reduces the “romantic” sense of the past. The two countries should learn and realize Indorf, Hans H., Impediments to Regional- that the serumpun factor, has both positive ism in Southeast Asia (Singapore: and negative aspects. To a certain degree, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, this element is still relevant and if they want 1984). to use it as a unifying force, both countries could creatively managed to produce a Jackson, Karl D., et al, ASEAN in Regional constructive relationship. and Global Context (Berkeley: Institute of East Asia Studies, the Bibliography University of California, 1986). Leifer, Michael, Books: Indonesia’s Foreign Policy, (Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1983). Andaya, Barbara Watson and Leonard Y. Andaya, A History of Malaysia Mackie, J.A.C., Konfrontasi: The Malaysia- (London: The MacMillan Press, Indonesian Dispute 1963-1966 (Lon- 1982). don: Oxford University Press, 1977.

Anwar, Dewi Fortuna, Indonesia in ASEAN: Nasution, A. H., Sekitar Perang Kemerde- Foreign Policy and Rgionalism kaan Indonesia, 1st book, 2nd ed., (Singapore: Institute of Southeast (Bandung: Penerbit Angkasa, 1977). Asian Studies, 1994). Omar, Ariffin, Bangsa Melayu: Malay Aris, Othman Mohamed , Ethnic Identity in Concepts of Democracy and a Malay Community in Malaysia Community: 1945-1950 (Oxford: (Urbana: Illinois, 1977). Oxford University Press, 1993).

Bhattacharjee, G. P., Southeast Asian Pathmanathan, M., et al, Winds of Change: Politics: Malaysia and Indonesia The Mahathir Impact on Malaysia’s

42 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Foreign Policy (Petaling Jaya: and Indonesia, in Pacific Affairs, Vol. Pelanduk Publication Sdn. Bhd., 54, No. 4, Winter 1981-1982. 1984). Valencia, Mark J. and Munadjat Penders, C.L.M., The Life and Times of Danusaputro, “Indonesia: Law of the Soekarno (London: Sidwick and Sea and Foreign Policy Issues, in The Jackson, 1974). Indonesian Quarterly, Vol. XII, No. 4, October 1984. Roff, William R., The Origins of Malay Nationalism, 2nd ed., (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1994). Magazines: Tham, Seong Chee, Defining “Malay”, seminar paper, (Singapore: National Asiaweek, November 27th, 1981. University of Singapore, 1992). Far Eastern Economic Review, January Weinstein, Franklin B., Indonesia Abandons 11th, 1990. Confrontation: An Inquiry into the Function of Indonesian Foreign Policy ______, April 26th, (New York: Cornell University, 1969). 1984.

th Journals: Kompas, July 5 , 1991

th Abdullah, Firdaus Haji, “The Rumpun ______, July 26 , 1991. Concept in Malaysia-Indonesia Relations’, in The Indonesian Pelita, June 20nd, 1991. Quarterly, Vol. XXI, No. 2, 1993. Suara Pembaruan, February 20th, 1991.

Djalal, Hasjim, ‘The 1982 of the Sea Con - nd vention: A Southeast Asia Perspect - ______, June 2 , 1991

ive’, in The Indonesian Quarterly, th Vol. XII, No. 1, January 1985. ______, June 4 , 1991.

th Kasim, Azizah, ‘The Unwelcome Guests: ______, Juni 5 , 1991. Indonesian Immigrants and Malaysian th Public Responses’, in Southeast ______, June 24 1991 Asian Journal of Social Science, Vol. XVI, No. 2, 1988. Tempo, January 1987.

Shiddique, Sharron and Leo Suryadinata, Republika Online: http://www.republika.co.id/, ‘Bumiputra and Pribumi: Economic th th Nationalism (Indiginism) in Malaysia September 9th, 11 , 23rd, 24 , 1996.

43 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Others:

Dalton, John, The Development of Malayan Foreign Policy, unpublished PhD. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1975.

44 BLS Wahyu Wardhani, “Indonesia-Malaysia relations in the Post-Confrontation Era: The Role of the Serumpun Concept,” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan Politik, Th XII, No 3-4, Oktober1999, 25-44.

Others:

Dalton, John, The Development of Malayan Foreign Policy, unpublished PhD. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1975.