Indonesia's leadership transition : will Jakarta's foreign policy change?

The forthcoming leadership transition in Indonesia will not result in radical foreign policy change. However, Indonesia is likely to diversify its foreign policy choices by promoting its emerging middle power status. This article continues a series on this year’s national elections

‘Dancing among elephants’ : framing the rise of Indonesia, South Africa and Turkey (2000-2015) by applying analytic eclecticism to the concept of pivot state

The rise of emerging powers in our contemporary world has sparked significant research interest. While the rise of the main ‘emerging powers’ – which are collectively referred to as BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) – has attracted the attention of many scholars, the rest of the emerging powers are still very much understudied. There is a trend of generalisation in the study of emerging powers whereby countries such as Indonesia, South Africa and Turkey are overlooked because their material capabilities are less than those of the BRIC countries. The lack of sufficient academic investigation of countries outside BRIC has made our understanding of current power shifts incomplete, because despite their smaller size, these non-BRIC emerging powers are a substantial element of the international system. This thesis proposes the use of a ‘pivot state’ conceptual framework to characterise non-BRIC emerging powers. As explained in chapter 3, three criteria to identify pivot states are introduced: (1) attitude towards the international order, (2) performed role, and (3) nexus between regional and global contexts. Pivot states are able to maintain a level of influence at the global level by carving out niches for themselves in areas in which they possess expertise, resources and reputation and through which they typically operate within a multilateral and institutionalised setting. Pivot states’ behaviours are framed in the theoretical construction of pivoting behaviours: (1) soft-revisionist, (2) normative bridge-builder, and (3) accommodative regional leadership. An investigation of three countries (Indonesia, South Africa and Turkey) presented via three thematic case studies – (1) states of concern, (2) climate change and (3) global economic governance and the G20 in chapters 5, 6, and 7 tests for the presence in these states of pivoting behaviours. From the exploration in these chapters, it is concluded that the three countries have displayed some elements of pivot states’ behaviours although there are variations among them. Indonesia has been a relatively consistent pivot state. South Africa’s membership in BRICS and BASIC has shaped its foreign policy towards a closer relation to BRIC countries. Nevertheless, as demonstrated in this thesis, South Africa is trying to maintain its relations with other groupings / entities. Since the stagnation of the EU membership negotiation in 2009, Turkey has begun to diversify its foreign policy beyond its traditional alliance with Western countries. Nevertheless, since it found that alternatives to the West were not promising, such as the failure of Turkey’s Iranian nuclear policy, Turkey has been significantly retreating to the West. In order to understand the motivations behind the pivoting behaviours, the concept of analytic eclecticism, which combines rationalist and constructivist approaches, is applied. Rationalism provides an explanation that these countries decided to display pivoting behaviours as a rational choice between their constrained ability to compete for relative gains and their careful attitude towards the primacy of absolute gains which often disadvantaged them. On the other hand, constructivism saw the pivoting behaviours as a result of compromise between multiple identities, which grew in number due to domestic transformation and international interaction

Middle powers in the Indo-Pacific: Potential pacifiers guarantying stability in the Indo-Pacific?

The article examines the potential of middle powers’ cooperation to establish communities of practice to reinforce their ability to influence world affairs. Illustrating the argument with three case studies—Australia, Indonesia, and South Korea—we assert that middle powers play key roles in structuring the world order. We test the following hypotheses: (i) middle powers do not look, nor do they need to look to great powers for leadership, and can influence events by forging new regional relationships; (ii) when leadership topples or tensions emerge between great powers, with a potential or nascent leadership vacuum, the initiative to guarantee the status quo (i.e., a liberal order) can be provided by middle powers. While rooted in IR theories, the research mostly builds upon the framework of communities of practice and management theories, linking them to highlight the importance of existing interactions, the opportunity for and advantage of greater cooperation and its potential systemic impact