[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 17044-17048]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




SENATE RESOLUTION 252--RECOGNIZING THE INCREASINGLY MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL 
 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE REPUBLIC OF 
                               INDONESIA

  Mr. BOND (for himself and Mr. Inouye) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                              S. Res. 252

       Whereas the historical ties between the United States and 
     the Indonesia go back to the period of Indonesian struggle 
     for independence and the early years of its independence in 
     1945;
       Whereas the constitutionally required ``free and active'' 
     foreign policy of Indonesia has largely resulted in a close 
     relationship with the United States, and this relationship 
     reflects the growing connections between the developed and 
     the developing world;
       Whereas, following the effects of the Asian financial 
     crisis in 1998, Indonesia has instituted numerous democratic 
     reforms, including--
       (1) amending the country's constitution in order to be more 
     democratic and transparent;
       (2) holding the country's first ever direct presidential 
     election in 2004 and direct, nationwide local elections 
     starting in 2006; and
       (3) giving the judicial branch independent administrative 
     and financial responsibility for all courts in 2004;
       Whereas the government of President Susilo Bambang 
     Yudhoyono, the first directly elected President of Indonesia, 
     is strongly committed to strengthening the country's 
     democracy and remains focused on developing good governance 
     and promoting and protecting human rights, civil liberties, a 
     free press, and a vibrant civil society;
       Whereas the Government of Indonesia continues to reform its 
     military in accordance with internationally accepted 
     democratic principles;
       Whereas Indonesia signed a peace agreement in August 2005 
     ending the conflict in Aceh, met its obligations under the 
     agreement, oversaw the return of normalcy to Aceh, and held 
     free, transparent, and peaceful elections for local 
     government leaders in December 2006;

[[Page 17045]]

       Whereas the Government of Indonesia has worked and 
     continues to work toward peaceful solutions to other internal 
     conflicts, including Papua, with concern for the welfare and 
     security of the entire population;
       Whereas, in parallel with the recovery of Indonesia's 
     economic and political stability following the 1998 Asian 
     financial crisis, the country has regained its pivotal role 
     in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and 
     continues to work toward a secure, peaceful, and vibrant 
     Southeast Asia, particularly by proposing successfully the 
     ASEAN Security Community, the ASEAN Economic Community, and 
     the ASEAN Socio-cultural Community;
       Whereas the Government and people of Indonesia have endured 
     several terrorist bombings, have shown resilience in the 
     fight against international terrorism by apprehending and 
     bringing to justice numerous perpetrators, and remain open to 
     international cooperation in this area;
       Whereas the Government of Indonesia, together with the 
     Governments of Malaysia and Singapore as fellow littoral 
     states and user-countries, has maintained and is further 
     strengthening efforts to secure the important international 
     shipping lane in the Malacca Strait;
       Whereas, as shown in international fora, the Government of 
     Indonesia remains committed to addressing the problems 
     related to the control of the spread of weapons of mass 
     destruction;
       Whereas the Government of Indonesia has deployed a military 
     battalion to support the United Nations Interim Force In 
     Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeeping operations, and as the world's 
     largest Muslim democracy, has made important contributions to 
     the facilitation of various dialogues among Islamic factions 
     in the Middle East; and
       Whereas, though the Government of Indonesia has shown 
     significant progress in the areas of democracy, good 
     governance, human rights, and counter terrorism, there 
     remains much to be done and many reforms yet to be 
     implemented: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate--
       (1) recognizes the progress made by the Government of 
     Indonesia in its efforts to promote democracy;
       (2) expresses ongoing support for further democratic reform 
     in Indonesia and the efforts of the Government and the people 
     of Indonesia toward developing good governance;
       (3) encourages the Government and the People of Indonesia 
     to continue working to ensure the promotion and protection of 
     human rights, civil liberties, a free press, and a strong 
     civil society in Indonesia; and
       (4) encourages the President, the Secretary of State, and 
     other officials of the United States Government to continue 
     assisting the Government of Indonesia in its efforts to 
     promote democracy and ensure the liberty and welfare of the 
     people of Indonesia.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, as a Member of the Senate who has traveled 
every year to Southeast Asia and met frequently with government leaders 
from that region when they visited the United States, I believe America 
has great interests in that region, and that we need to pay more 
attention here in Washington, DC and across the Nation, to our allies 
and partners in Southeast Asia.
  This region, economically, politically, strategically important, it 
is our 5th largest in total volume trading partner. Serving as a 
cornerstone to SE Asia and the lynchpin to its stability, prosperity 
and security lie in Indonesia.
  When I have asked leaders from all over Southeast Asia how they are 
doing, they always include a reference to Indonesia. Indonesia is the 
world's largest Muslim country and as a democracy, that makes it the 
largest Muslim democracy as well.
  On the darker side, it is also a key country in what many in the 
intelligence community, and I agree, is the second front in the war on 
terror that we confront. It is home to the Islamist terrorist group, 
Jemah Islamiya, which next to al-Qaeda, is one of the greatest threats 
to American security and peace in the world.
  Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has been executing an 
ambitious agenda for anti-corruption, political and economic reform. He 
represents Indonesia's best hope for continuing down a path towards 
stability, prosperity, pluralism, democracy and security. Such a path 
is not only in our own economic interests, but is also essential to 
control the terrorist threat and the reach of al-Qaeada and Jemah 
Islamiah in Southeast Asia.
  Since the fall of President Suharto, the Indonesian people have 
elected three new presidents, impeached one, and experienced several 
peaceful transfers of power. They have held direct elections of a 
president. They have amended their constitution in order to be more 
democratic and transparent. They have given the judicial branch 
independent administrative and financial authority. They continue to 
reform their military in accordance with democratic, civilian-
controlled principles.
  They have recently provided a battalion to support the UNIFIL forces 
in Lebanon; and Indonesia was recently cited by Freedom House as 
Southeast Asia's only truly ``free'' nation.
  But despite all the progress being made, we in Congress seem to 
continue to look for every transgression to put our relationship on 
hold and move it backwards.
  The truth is that as a country, Indonesia has made truly remarkable 
progress in a very short period of time. As such, they deserve 
continued support and engagement, not restrictions and retractions.
  We should recognize the accomplishments of the Indonesian people and 
encourage them in their pursuit of a successful transformation to a 
democratic nation.
  This is why I, along with my distinguished colleague Senator Inouye, 
am proud to introduce a resolution recognizing Indonesia's 
accomplishments and the increasingly mutually beneficial relationship 
between Indonesia and the U.S.
  As an archipelago of over 200 million people, if Indonesia were 
superimposed over the top of the United States, it would span from 
Florida to Alaska. The size of Indonesia and the fact that they have 
17,000 islands at low water, 13,000 at high tide, presents a tremendous 
challenge in defending its borders and dealing with potential terrorist 
activities on its distant islands or remote jungles.
  The Indonesian armed forces are a necessary partner in this battle. 
When Jemah Islamiah bombed the Bali nightclub in 2002, killing 202 
people, Indonesia's military, policing and intelligence capabilities 
were in poor condition. Of late however, Indonesia's security forces 
have ``gained the upper hand,'' according to the Economist, June 16th, 
2007 with the capture and arrest of some of Jemah Islamiah's top 
commanders.
  Leadimg the fight against terror is Indonesia's new police unit 88, 
which was set up with the help of American and Australian Security 
forces. Among the terrorists captured was Abu Dujana, one of 
Indonesia's most wanted terrorists. Dujana apparently took over as 
military leader of JI when their former leader and bomb maker, Azahari 
Husin, was in 2005 killed and had earned the dubious honor of being 
named the most wanted terrorist in the country. And over the last 12 
months, the Indonesians have captured or killed 47 terrorists, 
including several key leaders.
  The article also went on to say. . . .

       No large-scale attacks have taken place since 2005. With 
     the help of their Australian and American counterparts, 
     Indonesia's national police have greatly improved their 
     tracking of militants and have rounded up some of JI's top 
     leaders.

  In the recent past, there have been various forms of restrictions on 
our relations with the Indonesian military in light of terrible abuses 
that were committed by the TNI in East Timor. However, our 
reinstatement of military relations and the restoration of 
International Military Education & Training or IMET, has resulted in 
continued positive trends.
  It is interesting to note that the current President, when he was a 
military leader, was in the last class of IMET leaders from Indonesia 
to come to the United States. He, in his own person, demonstrates the 
appreciation of civilian control. Some in this body and the other body 
want to impose new restriction to hinder, not help, the productive 
influence our military can and has had on the TNI.
  We must expand and continue to improve our relations with the TNI, 
not restrict and retract. IMET provides for adherence to the Code of 
Military Justice, civilian of the military, respect for human rights, 
and proper treatment of population principles that should be instilled 
in military forces.

[[Page 17046]]

  Further, IMET establishes important relationships and alliances among 
our military leaders and commanders of friendly foreign forces. It 
assures they understand how to conduct military or relief operations 
together. and, it keeps the U.S. engaged in a region where China is 
increasingly, extending its influence. When I visited the North Western 
province of Ache, right after the Tsunami, the fact that their military 
had not trained with us caused us great military operational 
difficulties.
  Some in Congress apparently want to reimpose sanctions on IMET 
participation because of the past and perceived military abuses, but as 
Walter Lohman, Director of Asian Studies at the Heritage Foundation, 
has said:

       accountability for past human rights abuses and the proper 
     role of the militia are legitimate. But the United States 
     needs to get to a point where it addresses these concerns 
     with the same respect it affords other democratic partners, 
     like the Europeans or the Japanese

  Many leaders in that region have told me, privately, they believe 
U.S. active engagement and association with their countries is 
essential to stop China from extending hegemony over the region. 
Whether China is viewed as a threat or an opportunity, they are 
actively courting their neighbors in SE Asia; They are sending official 
trade missions, signing trade agreements and investing their large 
reserves in securing sources of energy and natural resources. Make no 
mistake about it, they are aggressively building up a military force 
navy capable of extending beyond the straits of Taiwan.
  The opportunities and the challenges related to China seeking to 
extend its influence over Southeast Asia should concern us both 
economically and militarily. States of Southeast Asia, notably 
Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia, control the important Malacca 
Straits; Straits through which one quarter of all the shipping in the 
world passes and one half of the petroleum products carried by ocean-
going vessels pass.
  Beyond those interests, it remains my thesis that we should pay 
attention to Southeast Asia--particularly Indonesia--as the second 
front in the war on terrorism.
  Indondsia represents the best hope for fostering a moderate Islam 
that recognizes the true peaceful nature of that religion in opposition 
to the radical terrorist-inspiring versions of Islam.
  With Southeast Asia and its large Muslim population, we have an 
opportunity through constructive forms of engagement; to ensure they 
become a solid foundation for peace, security and economic prosperity 
in this critical part of the world. Whether it is more peace corps 
volunteers, education initiatives, leadership exchanges, IMET or 
sending Navy ships such as the USS Mercy and USS Peleliu on 
humanitarian missions to the region.
  We can do it without the need for massive military actions such as 
those we have undertaken in Afghanistan and Iraq to root out the 
terrorists and in those cases, the governments that harbored them. In 
other words, more sandals on the ground now, will prevent having to put 
boots on the ground in future.
  I urge my colleagues to support countries like Indonesia in their 
path towards peace, democracy and pluralism, as opposed to restricting 
and pushing them towards more radical, terrorist-inspiring versions of 
Islam.
  I ask or behalf of Senator Inouye and myself that the resolution be 
sent to the desk and ask that it be referred appropriately.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the articles 
from the June 16th Economist and from Walter Lohman of the Asian 
Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                  [From the Economist, June 16, 2007]

                      Wounded But Still Dangerous

       When Jemaah Islamiah (JI), a South-East Asian Islamist 
     group, bombed nightclubs on the Indonesian island of Bali in 
     2002, killing 202 people, it exposed the poor state of the 
     country's anti-terrorist intelligence and policing. And the 
     attack did not seem to lead to much improvement. The bombers 
     struck again in 2003, at an American-run hotel in Jakarta, 
     and in 2004 at the Australian embassy there. In 2005 they 
     returned to Bali to attack three tourist restaurants. Of 
     late, however, Indonesia's security forces seem to have 
     gained the upper hand over JI.
       No large-scale attacks have taken place since 2005. With 
     the help of their Australian and American counterparts, 
     Indonesia's national police have greatly improved their 
     tracking of militants and have rounded up some of JI's top 
     leaders. This culminated on June 13th with confirmation that 
     they had arrested Abu Dujana, a JI leader whom police had 
     recently begun to describe as their ``most wanted''.
       Mr. Dujana is said to have fought in Afghanistan and 
     hobnobbed with Osama bin Laden. He is believed to have taken 
     charge of one of JI's military wings, and control of its 
     weapons and explosives, after the death of the group's chief 
     bombmaker, Azahari Husin, in a shoot-out with police in 2005. 
     It has even been suggested that Mr. Dujana is JI's emir, or 
     paramount leader. Another leading figure, Noordin Muhammad 
     Top, is still on the run. But the capture of Mr. Dujana and 
     several other terrorists in recent days follows the discovery 
     of a huge arsenal of guns and bomb-making materials in March. 
     It marks a ``very significant'' blow against JI, says Sidney 
     Jones, in Jakarta for the International Crisis Group (ICG), a 
     think-tank.
       Indonesia's arrests came shortly after Singapore revealed 
     that it was detaining four JI members, arrested between last 
     November and April, and freeing five detained earlier who had 
     ``responded positively to rehabilitation''. However, the 
     Philippines' army admitted last weekend that another JI 
     leader, known as Dulmatin, suspected of involvement in the 
     2002 Bali bombs, had again escaped its clutches. The army 
     believes he is hiding in the Tawi-Tawi Islands, off Borneo. 
     He and other fugitives in the southern Philippines are 
     suspected of teaching local Islamist militants how to make 
     bombs.
       Indonesia's recent policing successes are a tribute to two 
     new units set up after the 2002 bombings. One, which has 
     stayed out of the spotlight, is an intelligence-gathering 
     task-force. The other, Detachment 88, is a high-profile anti-
     terrorist squad, trained by American and Australian federal 
     police in making arrests and gathering forensic evidence. 
     Since their formation Indonesia's terror-fighting 
     capabilities have ``come on in leaps and bounds'', says Nigel 
     Inkster, an analyst at the International Institute for 
     Strategic Studies in London and until recently the deputy 
     head of the British external-intelligence service, M16. 
     Indonesia's army and its domestic-intelligence agency, BIN, 
     are not much good at anti-terrorism work, says Mr. Inkster, 
     so until the new police units were formed, foreign agencies 
     had no competent Indonesian counterparts.
       Despite Detachment 88's successes, Ms. Jones says the unit 
     is too small. When it raids terrorist bases it must rely on 
     help from Brimoh, a poorly trained paramilitary-police unit. 
     In January, for example, the two forces combined to storm a 
     JI hideout on Sulawesi, an Indonesian island plagued by 
     conflict between Muslims and Christians. Fifteen suspected 
     militants and one policeman died. An ICG investigation found 
     that the heavy casualties made local Muslims see extremists 
     as victims. Such incidents are counter-productive, 
     encouraging civilians to shelter JI militants.
       Another worry is lenient sentencing by Indonesia's courts. 
     JI's spiritual leader, Abu Bakar Basyir, was let out of jail 
     after serving 26 months of a 30-month sentence for his 
     alleged involvement in the 2002 bombings. The courts later 
     overturned his conviction altogether. The country's prisons, 
     riddled with corruption and incompetence, may serve as 
     recruiting and training centres for JI. Bringing terrorism 
     convicts together in a specially built new jail, as is 
     planned, may simply make the job of JI's ``tutors'' easier.
       For all the success in tracking down JI's military leaders, 
     the group's current plans and the extent of its network 
     remain something of a mystery. Unlike many terrorist groups 
     worldwide, JI lacks an overground political wing to elaborate 
     its demands. A study by the ICG last month reckoned the group 
     may still have around 900 members. But the scale of its 
     recruitment in universities and Islamic boarding schools in 
     unclear. There are signs that, as its bomb-planting and fund-
     raising activities are more successfully curbed, the group is 
     simply turning to cheaper and easier forms of terrorism, such 
     as assassinations.
       Along with the arrests and the seizure of weapons in March, 
     Indonesian police found a handwritten diagram showing that JI 
     operatives on Java, Indonesia's most populous island, had 
     been reorganised into a sariyah (possibly meaning 
     ``platoon''), implying that this was part of a new military 
     structure covering South-East Asia. But there have recently 
     been few signs of activity outside the group's Indonesian 
     heartland. Last week a general in Thailand's military-backed 
     government implied that Cambodian Muslims linked to JI were 
     somehow involved in the insurgency in Thailand's mainly 
     Muslim southern provinces. But he backtracked after the 
     Cambodian government furiously denounced his comments.
       There has been little recent evidence that JI or, for that 
     matter, al-Qaeda, has a hand

[[Page 17047]]

     in the Thai south's rising violence. But it is just the sort 
     of strife-torn place, full of alienated, angry Muslims, where 
     those seeking to organise jihad find fertile ground. Police 
     have pruned JI's top ranks. But its roots may still be 
     spreading.
                                  ____


                  [From the Economist, June 16, 2007]

                              Street Life

       Filthy children and fingerless lepers, tapping on car 
     windows and pleading for ``paisa, khana'' (cash, food), hang 
     around every busy traffic junction and market in Delhi. 
     Begging in Delhi is illegal though few are locked up. But if 
     the authorities have their way, it will soon be wiped out, as 
     part of a big clean-up before the capital hosts the 
     Commonwealth Games in 2010.
       Plans to obliterate other familiar features of Delhi ahead 
     of the games are controversial. A ban on some 300,000 stalls 
     selling freshly cooked snacks has enraged well-off foodies 
     and the poor alike. Animal-rights activists protested when 
     hundreds of unruly monkeys were rounded up and shut in cages. 
     A new scheme to herd the city's stray cows into a vast dairy 
     complex will doubtless anger many cow-revering Hindus.
       A radical plan to corral Delhi's beggars, in contrast, has 
     provoked little reaction. After an order from the High Court 
     that begging be stamped out, a report commissioned by Delhi's 
     Department for Social Welfare recommends that beggars be 
     rounded up by a special police squad and placed in beggar's 
     homes, which resemble jails more than hostels. The report, by 
     academics at the University of Delhi, also wants the public 
     to be educated about the ``evils of alms-giving'', which 
     ``promotes parasites''.
       The report entailed the fullest survey ever conducted of 
     Delhi's beggars. It offers revealing insights into their 
     earning potential. Of the 58,570 beggars counted, 5,003 were 
     interviewed in depth. Nearly half the adults earned between 
     50 and 100 rupees ($1.20-$2.40) a day, not much less than the 
     income of many daily wage labourers. About 3% said they 
     earned 100 to 500 rupees a day.
       Tales of high-earning beggars have often been used in India 
     to justify intolerance. But the survey also hints at the 
     underlying injustices. One-third of adult beggars were 
     disabled; 88% said they had no skills; almost all were 
     migrants from other parts of India--mostly the poor northern 
     states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh--and had taken up begging 
     because they could not find work.
       More than one-third were under the age of 18, like Mohammed 
     Alam, a ten-year-old orphan, who left Bihar with his aunt and 
     uncle a month ago. On arriving in Delhi, Mohammed's aunt 
     found a job ironing clothes; the boy, whose polio has left 
     him with a deformed leg and a limp, works a busy traffic 
     intersection for five hours at a stretch, earning between 10 
     and 20 rupees. The rest of the time he spends at home (``in 
     that park over there''). He has not been to school since he 
     was seven, he says, his small face a complete blank.
                                  ____


                  [From the Economist, June 16, 2007]

                             A Museum Boom

       Cities and towns across China are rushing to build museums. 
     These are not the dour edifices of the Mao era that until 
     recent years were the dreary repositories of the nation's 
     historical treasures. Governments, and even some individuals, 
     are lavishing huge sums on vast and exotic new buildings. 
     Sadly, this does not imply a new-found respect for history.
       In 1977, a year after Chairman Mao's death, there were only 
     300-odd museums. Most of them were little more than displays 
     of Communist Party propaganda. Within a decade, say official 
     press reports, the number had grown to nearly 830. By the 
     turn of the century there were more than 2,000 of them. By 
     2015, officials estimate, there will be around 3,000.
       Beijing alone now has at least 131 museums, up from 96 a 
     decade ago. In January the Stalinist-looking National Museum 
     overlooking Tiananmen Square was closed down for a three-year 
     makeover costing $330m. Last year saw the formal opening of 
     the city's new Capital Museum, which cost more than $160m. 
     Shanghai is fast catching up. It plans to have 150 museums by 
     2010, up from 106.
       Local governments, caught up in what the Chinese press call 
     a ``museum fever'', are vying to outdo one other with 
     architectural wonders. Most are paid for out of government 
     budgets. But near the city of Chengdu, in south-western 
     China, a local businessman, Fan Jianchuan, opened a 33-
     hectare (82-acre) museum complex two years ago. Its exhibits 
     are boldly revisionist, highlighting the contributions made 
     by the Kuomintang, the party's enemy, in the anti-Japanese 
     war of the 1930s and 40s.
       Officials worry that the museum boom is getting out of 
     control. The country has a dearth of people qualified to run 
     them. Local governments are often unwilling to subsidise 
     running costs, forcing museums to rely on ticket sales. 
     Prices are often too high for many ordinary townspeople.
       The museum fad is a refreshing contrast to the culture-
     destroying ethos of Mao's rule. But the penchant for 
     vandalism still lurks. This week Qiu Baixing, a deputy 
     minister of construction, said historical architecture and 
     cultural sites were being ``devastated'' by rapid urban 
     construction. He even compared this to the destruction 
     wrought by Mao's Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. 
     The museums may look splendid, but, around them, history is 
     being pulverised.
                                  ____


        Adjusting to the Reality of a Newly Democratic Indonesia

                           (By Walter Lohman)

       Jakarta, June 18, 2007--In Washington, inertia often 
     carries the day on even the most anachronistic policy ideas. 
     Congress proved this axiom on June 5 when appropriators in 
     the House of Representatives slashed and conditioned the 
     Administration's request to provide military assistance to 
     Indonesia.
       Indonesia today is a large, vibrant democracy and a key 
     piece of the geostrategic puzzle in Asia. It is also among 
     the United States' most important partners in the War on 
     Terror. Approached wisely, the U.S.-Indonesian relationship 
     embodies a convergence of interests on values, geopolitics, 
     and security that is rare among U.S. relationships in the 
     developing world.
       The House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign 
     Operations has charted a strikingly unwise course. Under the 
     leadership of Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY), it has 
     covered its collective ears to the history of the last decade 
     and has forged ahead with a policy that ignores reality and 
     the vital American interests at stake in the region.
       Military assistance to Indonesia first became a matter of 
     contention in Washington following the Dili Massacre of 1991, 
     in which hundreds of protestors in East Timor were murdered 
     by the armed forces of East Timor's erstwhile ruler, 
     Indonesia. The debate was stoked in 1999 by the scorched 
     earth reaction of Indonesian troops and pro-Indonesia 
     militias to East Timor's overwhelming vote in favor of 
     independence. For good reason, these unconscionable abuses 
     strained relations between the United States and Indonesia.
       But since 1999, the world has been turned upside down. An 
     emerging, unstable democracy then, Indonesia is now a 
     flourishing democracy. In October 1999, Indonesia elected a 
     president--albeit indirectly--for the first time in 50 years. 
     Five years later, an astounding 350 million votes were cast 
     in three national elections--inc1uding a direct election for 
     president.
       The final round of the 2004 presidential election, 
     involving 117 million voters and 77 percent of eligible 
     voters, was the largest single election day in history. Among 
     the many remarkable facets of Indonesia's democracy, the 2004 
     elections produced 61 women members of the 550-seat lower 
     house and 27 out of 128 in the upper house.
       Acknowledging that elections do not necessarily equal 
     democracy, it should also be pointed out that Indonesians 
     have taken to vigorously exercising their civil liberties. 
     There are 16 political parties, hundreds of newspapers and 
     magazines, independent television and radio outlets, and 
     countless web sites commenting on Indonesian politics. Lively 
     political debate reverberates across many forums and media. 
     According to Freedom House, Indonesia is the freest country 
     in Southeast Asia. Symbolic of Indonesia's progress, in 2005, 
     Indonesian President Bambang Susilo Yudhoyono visited the 
     site of the 1991 Dili Massacre to pay his respects. The East 
     Timorese Prime Minister reciprocated by telling his 
     countrymen to ``Forget the past and look to the future.'' 
     Today, Indonesia and East Timor enjoy a close, cooperative 
     relationship due in major part to the effort of former 
     president and independence-hero Xanana Gusmao.
       The same week that House appropriators were taking 
     Indonesia to task, in fact, the current president of East 
     Timor, Jose Ramos Horta, was in Jakarta echoing the same 
     sentiment offered by his government in 2005, saying, ``The 
     important thing is we don't allow ourselves to be hostage of 
     the past but look forward with courage.''
       Despite its searing, up-close experience in the 1990s, East 
     Timor has come to peace with Indonesia. Yet, its well-meaning 
     supporters in the U.S. Congress seem unable to acknowledge 
     new realities.


                Strategic Concerns for the United States

       Two other things have changed since 1999.
       First, the meteoric rise of China has made the presence of 
     a strong, U.S.-friendly ASEAN--the association of 10 
     Southeast Asian nations on China's strategic doorstep--a 
     critical U.S. interest. Indonesia, straddling waters that 
     accommodate half of the world's commercial cargo transit, is 
     an important part of U.S. geopolitical calculations in its 
     own right. But, as a nation of 235 million people and 17,000 
     islands, it is also ASEAN's indispensable power.
       Every day, China becomes a more effective competitor for 
     the region's interests. Particularly since 2002, its focus in 
     Southeast Asia has shifted from its territorial claims in the 
     South China Sea to lavishing the region with diplomatic 
     attention. Without due vigilance, commitment, and wise policy 
     choices, the time is not far off when the U.S. role as 
     guarantor of regional security and stability will be up for 
     grabs. The United States needs friends in the region; and 
     Indonesia, by wholeheartedly embracing universal democratic 
     ideals, has made being friends as easy as any nation in the 
     world.

[[Page 17048]]

       Second, the United States is six years into waging the good 
     fight on global terrorism. Indonesia and the U.S. share 
     fundamental interests in this war. Indonesians themselves 
     have been victims of terrorism. Terrorists have directed 
     major acts of violence against the country's tourism industry 
     and foreign communities, killing many innocent foreigners as 
     well as Indonesians.
       For many years, the terrorists have sought to inflame 
     sectarian divisions in the same way that al-Qaeda has done so 
     effectively elsewhere in the world. Terrorists have also 
     sought to establish training beachheads in Indonesia's far-
     flung territories. But the terrorists in Indonesia are 
     losing: There have been no major acts of terrorism in 
     Indonesia since October 2005. Moderation is in the DNA of 
     Indonesia's national character. Certainly, there is a battle 
     going on for Indonesia's soul, as is being waged in much of 
     the Muslim world.
       But in Indonesia, the extremists are faced with an 
     extraordinarily resilient foe in Indonesia's famously 
     syncretic, diverse, and tolerant culture. Congress can help 
     strengthen the Indonesian government's hand through 
     assistance and partnership, or it can hamper it by caveating 
     its assistance. Indonesia will fight the war against terror 
     without the United States; but American cooperation certainly 
     improves its prospects. It is in the national interest for 
     the United States to be there for its natural partners.
       None of this is to suggest that the United States does not 
     have differences with Indonesia. Indeed, Representative 
     Lowey's concerns about accountability for past human rights 
     abuses and the proper role of the military are legitimate. 
     But the United States needs to get to a point where it 
     addresses these concerns with the same respect it affords 
     other democratic partners, like the Europeans or the 
     Japanese.
       Limiting and legally conditioning military-to-military 
     relations is not the best way to address differences; it is a 
     page from the past. The recent action by House appropriators 
     is counterproductive and damaging to vital American interests 
     in Asia.

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Bond in 
submitting a resolution, which recognizes the mutually beneficial 
relationship between the United States and the Republic of Indonesia.
  Indonesia is the world's fourth most populous country, the third 
largest democracy, and the most populous Muslim nation. It possesses 
extensive natural resources, and a considerable amount of trade passes 
through the straits of Malacca. Without question, Indonesia is a 
valuable partner to the United States in the global war on terror.
  Indonesia has made great strides in continuing to democratize and 
develop its civil society as well as rule of law, particularly under 
the leadership of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. This resolution 
acknowledges many of the Government's positive reforms and encourages 
the Republic of Indonesia to continue its commitment to human rights, 
democratic principles, and good governance.
  Mr. President, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in 
recognizing this very important nation in Southeast Asia.

                          ____________________