For the past six years, the entire nation has closely scrutinized Dino Patti Djalal’s every word. This is no surprise since he has been the spokesman of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono since 2004.
During Yudhoyono’s second term, Dino took on the additional advisory job of special staff for international affairs. He was involved in crafting various programs, including the Global Inter-Media Dialogue, which looks at the delicate relationship between press freedom and religious-cultural tolerance.
Starting this month, Dino will be moving into a new role. The career diplomat, who holds a doctorate from the London School of Economics, has been recently designated as Indonesia’s Ambassador to the United States. The high-profile Washington job is a step up for the rising star, who also received the prestigious Bintang Jasa Utama award on Independence Day.
Dino joined the Foreign Affairs Ministry in 1987. He served as a diplomat during the turbulent transition in East Timor and has also been posted to London; in a previous stint in Washington he directed the North American Affairs division of the ministry. During an interview with the Jakarta Globe, Dino talked about being the presidential spokesman, his agenda as ambassador to the US and his next big step — which will probably surprise people.
What was the most memorable moment that you had a presidential spokesperson?
The most difficult time was the [Aceh] tsunami in 2004 because of the scale of the disaster. It was also the first test of the SBY presidency. SBY had only been sworn in a few weeks earlier, the tsunami came, and the country was not ready to deal with a natural disaster of that kind. We’ve never faced a natural disaster of that scale. It was the worst natural disaster in history. So we constantly had to improvise and we had to do so in a very difficult and emotional environment. My experience walking in Baiturrahman Mosque, where the bodies were still on the floor, was indescribable.
It was a surreal moment and atmosphere, but the president coped with the crisis. He became a ‘crisis president’ after the tsunami and realized that we were going to have more crises after that, or at least more challenges.
Having a ‘crisis president’ means that demands and criticism abound. How did you handle those?
I’m fortunate enough to have a president who understand that criticism is normal and good in a democracy even though he came from a military background. President SBY was a general who had very strong democratic instincts, which was rare at the time because the upbringing of military people was about authoritarianism. But also, President SBY has been criticized for being too sensitive to criticism, but that also has it’s good side because that made him very responsive.
He reads the SMS that comes to his wife or his phone or to the palace phone, we have this 9949 SMS Inbox. He pays attention to them, because he thinks it’s a form of direct democracy. The president made it clear to me that I don’t have an opinion, in the sense that I must always be the voice o f what the president says. My personal views don’t matter in this. My job is to reflect what the president says and his instructions. That is why when journalists call me and I don’t have an answer, I tell them I don’t have an answer and I need to consult the president.
What was it like to not be able to express your personal opinion on pressing matters? Does a spokesperson have any room at all to express his view on issues?
I feel completely fine with it because I’m here to serve at the pleasure of the president so I need to make sure that I represent him honestly. But I also don’t have a problem with that because I have plenty of opportunities to give advice to the president in my capacity as special staff. To be honest, I enjoy that a lot, more than my capacity as a spokesperson. Every time I say something, I think about it all day and all night, ‘Did I say something wrong? Did I relay the wrong nuance about an issue?’ I’m a horrible spokesperson. I think about my words too much.
How do you deal with bad press?
We cannot respond to every criticism or bad story. We try to, but it’s beyond our capacity to respond to all bad news, and I don’t think it’s prudent to do so. Secondly, no matter what you do, in a democratic atmosphere, you’re bound to have some criticism. The trick is to be able to sort out the constructive from the blind criticism.
What would be your main agenda as an ambassador?
The most important thing is to redefine the soul of Indonesia-US relations. What is the construct of Indonesia-US relations in the 21st century? That is the big question that we have to answer. And how is it that the 21st century is constructed differently than the era of the ’60s, or the ’70s.
The question is whether or not we can move this relationship forward without the baggage that we’ve had over the last 30 to 40 years. So it’s an exciting time because it is the time to redefine the relationship of Indonesia and America. Can we engage America as equals? Can we engage America as a strategic partner?
With US President Barrack Obama’s history with Indonesia, do you think that he is treating Indonesia as a strategic or symbolic partner?
The fact that President Obama studied and lived in Indonesia is important for the relationship because it allows him to have a flavor of the country and it reflects an emotional connection with Indonesia, which is not easy to strike if he had not lived in Indonesia. But this relationship is not about sentiments — it’s about interests, national interests.
America is the only superpower in the world now, Indonesia is the largest country in Southeast Asia and the largest economy in Southeast Asia and we are now also a crossroads for many trade- dependent nations. We also have the largest Muslim population in the world, and in the post 9/11 world, that is very important. We are also the third largest democracy in the world. We have 30 percent of the world’s rainforests, which makes us indispensable in climate diplomacy.
So all these things make us not only symbolically interesting, but also make us strategically important from world peace, to the reform of the world economy, to the debate on climate change, to Islam and the West and all these issues, so I think there is realization on the part of the White House that Indonesia-US relations must be elevated to a new level.
What do you see as the main challenges in our relationship with the US?
The challenge is how this idea, domestically in both Jakarta and Washington, DC, can be internalized beyond just the White House and the Istana Presiden [Presidential Palace]. In [the US Congress], they need to understand this more because there are those in US Congress who still see Indonesia in the old perspective, and that’s not helpful.
Getting [Americans] to understand that Indonesia is not the Indonesia of the Suharto years, that Indonesia is a country that embraces pluralism and tolerance, and believes in moderate Islam, and we can bridge Islam and the West, that’s very important. Our voice matters because of the assets that we have.
So many times, Indonesia loses out on opportunities because of xenophobia, and so many times we lose because we entertain too many conspiracy theories. And in our government, the tendencies toward xenophobia, toward conspiracy theories, toward inward-looking mindsets, are still there. Our diplomatic activities cannot advance because they are weighed down by people who constantly see ghosts in the daylight, people who see the world as a threat rather than as an opportunity.
Why is now the perfect time for Indonesia to reorient its foreign policy?
We have a good foreign policy president in SBY, who understands the world, Indonesia’s place in the world, the logic of international relations and the need to have more friends and no enemies. So now is the time for diplomats to rethink diplomacy, to rethink how to advance Indonesia’s place in the world in ways never thought of before. I am convinced that the path of openness, the path of connectivity, the path of innovation, of engaging the world, what I call Indonesian Internationalism, is the path of the future.
You’ve gone from ministry official to presidential spokesman and now, ambassador. What’s next?
My wife and I have discussed this. I foresee the possibility of leaving [the diplomatic service] early, maybe joining politics at the right time. I will only do so for two reasons. One, if I’m very sure that joining politics would be the best way for me to enhance my contribution to the country. I don’t want to joint politics for narcissistic reasons, just to fulfill my personal ego. Secondly, if I join any political party, I have to be absolutely sure that I believe in the political party that I join. Joining a political party is different from joining a company.
When you join a political party, you give your soul. And you have to absolutely believe in the ideology, the vision of that party. This is what I would like to advise all politicians. When you join a party, you have to believe in the ideology. It’s not just joining as a vehicle to get a political job.
PDF This post was submitted by Armando Siahaan .
