PROLIFERATION SECURITY -- INDONESIA CONTINUES TO

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 JAKARTA 003396 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR EAP, EAP/MTS, EAP/MLS, EAP/RSP, ISN/CPI NSC FOR E.PHU E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/14/2017 TAGS: PREL PHSA PARM PTER ID AS SUBJECT: PROLIFERATION SECURITY -- INDONESIA CONTINUES TO ENGAGE REF: A. STATE 164809 ¶B. JAKARTA 3356 ¶C. JAKARTA 2161 Classified By: Pol/C Joseph Legend Novak, reasons 1.4(b+d). ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: The GOI-hosted conference on the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) on December 12 yielded a constructive exchange of views. U.S. and Australian participants felt the exchange moved forward the dialogue with the GOI. While noting--sometimes unhelpfully--familiar reservations, Indonesian participants sounded some positive notes suggesting that the GOI continues to review PSI with a view to possible low-level cooperation in the future. Mission recommends that the USG work with Australia to find additional ways--including observation of exercises--to engage Indonesia in the near term. END SUMMARY. INDONESIA'S CONFERENCE ¶2. (SBU) On December 12 in Jakarta, Indonesia hosted a conference on PSI in the context of maritime security. The conference presented the pros and cons of PSI before an audience of about 70 officials from various Indonesian agencies whose work deals with maritime security policy. Speakers from the U.S. Department of State, the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the National University of Singapore and two Indonesian agencies gave 15-20 minute presentations, followed by a lively question-and-answer session. The conference was designed to educate Indonesia officials on PSI and secondarily to explore possibilities for Indonesian cooperation with PSI. AN OBJECTIVE INQUIRY ¶3. (SBU) Mulya Wirana from the Office of International Treaties and Legal Affairs in the Indonesian Department of Foreign Affairs (DEPLU),opened the conference. In his balanced remarks, he highlighted the maritime security theme by posing the question of how to reconcile the right of free passage on the high seas with the need to interdict certain contraband cargoes. ¶4. (SBU) Philip (Tony) Foley, Director for Counterproliferation Initiatives, and Theodore (Ted) Knez, Deputy for Counter- proliferation in the International Security Division of the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, provided an overview of PSI and its main features. Foley and Knez emphasized that PSI complemented and reinforced existing laws and treaties, that dramatic interdiction operations were rare, that most PSI activities occurred quietly and out of the public view, often within the host country. They noted that PSI was designed to identify and upgrade a country's capabilities, that flag-state consent was important and that participant countries were under no legal requirement to act. ¶5. (C) The U.S. and Australian presentations were followed by a rather polemical statement by Andy Rachmianto, Deputy Director for International Security and Disarmament at the Department of Foreign Affairs. Rachmianto recited the standard Indonesian reservations about PSI: that its membership was "selective, voluntary and not internationally negotiated;" that it was not a UN program; that it deliberately targeted so-called "rogue states" while sparing proliferators like Israel, India and Afghanistan; that the dual-use character of most WMD materials made it difficult to identify them and risky to take action; and, that false interdictions impeded free trade. ¶6. (C) The generally negative tone of Rachmianto's remarks was not replicated by subsequent Indonesian officials. Pol/C later spoke with Rachmianto, underscoring that the USG and the GOI had agreed to a "Strategic Partnership," which underlined the need for cooperation between the two nations on security and other matters. PRESSING FOR COOPERATION ¶7. (SBU) Robert Beckman, an Amcit and Professor of Law at the National University of Singapore, made a constructive JAKARTA 00003396 002 OF 002 presentation. He noted that PSI was only one element of maritime security, which also involved trafficking in persons, illegal fishing, piracy and terrorism; that the International Maritime Organization (IMO) had given maritime security a high priority after September 11, 2001; and, that a country's permission was required in order to board a ship in its territorial waters. ¶8. (SBU) Beckman also highlighted the problem of stopping the air transport of WMD, suggested PSI interdiction requests could exacerbate tensions between countries and asserted PSI might conflict with the Law of the Sea. On the other hand, he said Indonesia could not close its eyes to the importance of its strategic location in the world, could not "just say no" to PSI and should become better informed about PSI. He suggested that Indonesia's long fight against terrorism (since independence) and its strong CT laws could serve as a model for Indonesian engagement on PSI. LET'S KEEP THE DOOR OPEN ¶9. (SBU) Hasyim Djalal--a GOI adviser on maritime issues and a highly influential former ambassador--focused his presentation on legal aspects of the UN Convention of the Law of the Seas (1982),enunciating standing Indonesian reservations about the legal implications of PSI. He also highlighted the concern that, once a member, Indonesia would be expected to act and would be subject to international criticism if it did not. ¶10. (SBU) In one of his more positive approaches on the subject to date, however, Djalal made clear that the GOI should keep the door open to PSI. He called for going "step by step" with PSI in order to become more familiar with it, encouraged Indonesia to participate in U.S. and other international programs to strengthen port security and export controls, and urged Indonesia to participate "ad hoc" in, or observe, PSI training programs and exercises which were open to non-members. He added that Indonesia should in any case amend its laws to comply with PSI principles. NEXT STEPS ¶11. (C) Mission appreciates Washington's quick and supportive response to the short-notice Indonesian request for a speaker and ISN/CPI Director Foley's participation in the conference. While Indonesian officials did express some familiar reservations re PSI, they did seem newly open to the initiative and to discussing it further. They admitted that as a government they are in a learning mode re the whole issue and noted that they had limited resources to support PSI if they became a member. ¶12. (C) Mission recommends that the USG work with Australia to find additional ways to engage Indonesia on this topic in the near term. One way forward is to press an Australian proposal (ref c) for a more in-depth discussion of PSI with the purpose of seeking to resolve Indonesian concerns. Australian Embassy contacts subsequently indicated a similarly favorable assessment of the Indonesian effort and expressed appreciation for U.S. support in including an Australian speaker at the conference. HUME