Donald K. Emmerson discusses possible reasons for Indonesia’s resistance to disaster relief aid
On Monday, an undersea earthquake shook Indonesia's remote Mentawai Islands and triggered a 10-foot tsunami: It has killed at least 272 people, and left 412 missing. The first cargo plane with humanitarian supplies arrived today. Hundreds of miles away in eastern Java, the volcanic Mount Merapi erupted Tuesday and killed at least 30 people.
That's two disasters in less than 24 hours.
Indonesia is no stranger to catastrophe. It is located along the Pacific Ring of Fire, which is one of the most seismically and volcanically volatile areas in the world. Its last sizeable earthquake and tsunami duo struck in December of 2004, killing more than 225,000 people in 14 countries.
But despite the death and destruction of the last 48 hours, Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said today that he doesn't yet see a need for foreign aid or rescue assistance.
So far, only the Philippines and the United States have offered to help Indonesia. But Natalegawa's behavior seems counter-intuitive. In the face of disaster, why would any country preemptively say no to aid?
A look into Indonesia's history reveals latent political sensitivities that may have influenced Natalegawa's decision. Indonesia's first president, Sukarno, was a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement, an organization of countries who are not aligned with or against any major world power.
Indonesia prides itself on its "independent and active" foreign policy, which was first developed by then Vice President Mohammad Hatta on September 2, 1948 in Central Java. "Do we, Indonesians, in the struggle for the freedom of our people and our country, only have to choose between Russia and America?" he asked. "Is not there any other stand that we can take in the pursuit of our ideals?"
The "other stand" became known as "mendayung antara dua karang" or "rowing between two reefs."
Indonesia doesn't want to appear incompetent, or weak, to outside governments, and may also be wary to accept aid for fear of undermining its national legitimacy.
In 2004, Indonesia's acceptance of aid had an arguably negative effect on its citizens. "Though the post-tsunami reconstruction efforts in Aceh were generally successful, the amount of aid did engender some resentment in Jakarta over whether the national government had lost control of the reconstruction, and also potentially altered the economy in Aceh," explains Josh Kurlantzick a fellow for southeast Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. "So people remember that."
Donald Emmerson, the director of the Southeast Asia Forum at Stanford University's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, cites several reasons for Natalegawa's response. First, he says, if the Indonesian government solicited foreign aid, it would be inundated with offers. Coordinating offers of assistance right now would be a severe burden on the government.
Then there's the question of scale: so far, the destruction seems manageable in comparison to the 2004 disaster. Still, it's unclear whether Indonesia will be able to adequately respond on its own. "Indonesia is a large country, and its infrastructure is overstretched," Emmerson says. "Its capacity to respond effectively to domestic disasters is not as good as it might be."
Analyzing Evacuation Versus Shelter-in-Place Strategies After a Terrorist Nuclear Detonation
Professor Wein received his PhD in Operations Research from Stanford in 1988 and has taught core MBA courses in operations management throughout his entire career, both at MIT's Sloan School of Management from 1988 to 2002 and, since 2002, at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, where he is currently Paul E. Holden Professor of Management Science. He has also been a Senior Fellow (by courtesy) at FSI since 2003.
Since 2001, Wein has analyzed a variety of homeland security problems. His homeland security work includes four papers in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: one on an emergency response to a smallpox attack, a second on an emergency response to an anthrax attack, a third presenting a biometric analysis of the US-VISIT Program, and a fourth analyzing a bioterror attack on the milk supply. He has also published the Washington Post op-ed "Unready for Anthrax" (2003) and the New York Times op-ed "Got Toxic Milk?" (2005) and has written papers on port security, indoor remediation after an anthrax attack, and the detention and removal of illegal aliens. He was also Editor-in-Chief of Operations Research from 2000 to 2005. Wein has won several awards, including the 1993 Erlang Prize for the outstanding applied probabilist under 35 years of age and the 2002 Koopman Prize for the best paper in military operations research.
Lawrence M. Wein
Graduate School of Business
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-5015
Lawrence Wein is the Jeffrey S. Skoll Professor of Management Science at the Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, and an affiliated faculty member at CISAC. After getting a PhD in Operations Research from Stanford University in 1988, he spent 14 years at the Sloan School of Management at MIT, where he was the DEC Leaders for Manufacturing Professor of Management Science. His research interests include mathematical models in operations management, medicine and biology.
Since 2001, he has analyzed a variety of homeland security problems. His homeland security work includes four papers in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, on an emergency response to a smallpox attack, an emergency response to an anthrax attack, a biometric analysis of the US-VISIT Program, and an analysis of a bioterror attack on the milk supply. He has also published the Washington Post op-ed "Unready for Anthrax" (2003) and the New York Times op-ed "Got Toxic Milk?", and has written papers on port security, indoor remediation after an anthrax attack, and the detention and removal of illegal aliens.
For his homeland security research, Wein has received several awards from the International Federation of Operations Research and Management Science (INFORMS), including the Koopman Prize for the best paper in military operations research, the INFORMS Expository Writing Award, the INFORMS President’s Award for contributions to society, the Philip McCord Morse Lectureship, the Frederick W. Lanchester Prize for best research publication, and the George E. Kimball Medal. He was Editor-in-Chief of Operations Research from 2000 to 2005, and was elected to the National Academy of Engineering in 2009.
Kim Jong-un will be like his father: ambitious, aggressive and ruthless
The North Korean leader Kim Jong-il and his youngest son and presumed successor, Kim Jong-un, jointly attended military maneuvers on an unspecified date. This was the first official outing of the 27-year-old youngest son of the "Dear Leader." These maneuvers were held just before the Sunday celebration of the 65th anniversary of the founding of the Workers Party of Korea. David Straub, associate director of the Korean Studies Program at Stanford University, discussed the informal transfer of power that took place last week.
What was learned last week about
the succession to Kim Jong-il in North Korea?
The maneuvers confirmed with near certainty the past few years of speculation
that the third son of Kim Jong-il has been informally designated as his
successor. This process is now public. This is the first time that the name of
Kim Jong-un has been published in North Korea. However, as long as his father
is alive and can govern, he will remain in power. But, clearly, his health is
not good. This official outing of the son seems in preparation for the
possibility that Kim Jong-il may die suddenly. Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke in
2008, after which he disappeared for several months. Upon his return, he had
lost weight and appeared stiff and impaired on his left side.
Was Kim Jong-un touted as the successor?
There were no signs until a few years ago. First, it was Kim Jong-nam, the
eldest son, who was favored. Officially, he fell out of the race when he was
caught entering Japan with a forged passport. At the time, he told Japanese
officials he wanted to take his son to Tokyo Disneyland [the target of an attempted
contract killing by Kim Jong-un in 2008, the eldest now lives happily in Macao,
ed.]. It is then the second son, Kim Jong-chol, who was poised to be the
successor. But in Pyongyang, it was thought that he was not sufficiently
ambitious and aggressive. Then, all eyes turned to Kim Jong-un, who has the
personality of his father: ambitious, aggressive, and ruthless.
The main question then was how Kim Jong-un would be promoted. Most observers were betting on a gradual process. In this sense, it is not really surprising. He was appointed as a four-star general, which is a mostly symbolic distinction. He was also made vice-president of the Central Military Party. This underscores how strong the military is in North Korea. What surprised me most is that the younger sister of Kim Jong-il was also appointed as a four-star general. In line with the predictions of observers, Kim Jong-il has mobilized his immediate family to create a sort of regency capable of supporting his son in the event of his sudden death.
What is known about Kim Jong-un?
He was probably born in 1983 or 1984. However, the regime may try to say he was
born in 1982. In Chinese culture-and also in North Korea-numbers are
significant. Kim Il-sung, his grandfather, was born in 1912. Kim Jong-il was
born in 1942. That would put Kim Jong-un in a kind of celestial lineage. It is
almost certain that he attended school in Switzerland, where he was a quiet
student. He had a false name, Pak-un, and one or two close friends. He also
liked basketball. He then returned to Pyongyang. Some unconfirmed reports say
he studied at a military university. A few years ago, it was said he had been
appointed to the office of the Workers Party and the office of National Defense
Committee, which is the highest organ of power in North Korea.
Who now heads North Korea? What is the
power structure like?
The general view is that Kim Jong-il is the supreme leader-an absolute
dictator-and he has tremendous latitude. He bases his legitimacy on the fact
that he is the son of the founder of the regime. But nobody can run a country
alone. He must therefore take into account various factors. In North Korea in
recent decades, the military has played a growing role and seems to occupy a
dominant place today.
A university professor based in South Korea believes that the regime in Pyongyang has greatly copied Japanese pre-war fascism, even though Korea fought against imperialism. The scheme is based on a totalitarian structure, relying in particular upon the military. Information is very strictly controlled and the population is monitored, as in East Germany. The structure remains very closed, and the leadership is afraid to open up to the outside world and receive investment or foreign aid. Finally, family occupies an important place. North Korea is part of China's cultural sphere, with a strong presence of Confucianism. The notion of the state is close to the family structure model. The king is seen as the head of the family.
Does a period of transition put the
regime in danger? What took place before?
It is inevitable that one day a regime that is so rigid and incapable of
transformation will suffer major changes. However, we cannot say when or what
form this will take. But it is clear that unusual things can happen during a
period of change like this. The last transition was very similar to the current
process. The difference is that Kim Jong-il had been clearly designated as the
successor by his father and he had decades to gradually gain experience and
consolidate his power within the system. Kim Jong-il managed most affairs of
state since 1980, when the last Workers Party meeting was held. He was the de facto leader for 14 years. When his
father died in 1994, however, he took three years to formally become established
as the leader. The difference today is that Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke in
2008. Some people in North Korea are afraid that his son had not had enough
time to prepare for power. Kim Jong-un must particularly ensure that the
military is loyal to him. That is why he was made a general.
What legacy does he leave his son Kim
Jong-un?
Although North Korea has said for decades that it follows the principles of juche or self-sufficiency, it largely
sustained itself during the Cold War by trade with the USSR and its satellite
states, and China. It received much help. Now that the USSR has collapsed and
China has turned to a market economy, the economic situation in North Korea has
become untenable. The country suffered a terrible famine in the mid-1990s.
Nobody knows for sure how many people died, but it was certainly several
hundred thousand. Some say that there were more than one million deaths, out of
a total population of 22-23 million people. The government then had to loosen
its grip on the system. This has helped the country recover. Today, access to
basic resources is much better in North Korea than it was fifteen years ago.
The country was also helped by foreign aid from Japan, South Korea, the United States, and China. Now, because of the crisis over its nuclear program, the only foreign aid that comes into Pyongyang is from China. The North Korean regime faces a dilemma: its only resource is its workers. It fears opening up to accept foreign capital and technology, which would expose the people to outside reports that fundamentally contradict the regime's decades-old claims. That is why the few commercial contacts are with ideologically similar countries, like Syria or Iran. As for the industrial project in Kaesong near the border between North and South, it is very closely monitored by the authorities.
What is the situation at the diplomatic level?
North Korea has no close allies in the world. It cooperates with Cuba, Syria, or Iran, but these countries are isolated. Their relationship is either rhetorical or in connection with the nuclear program. As for its neighbors, North Korea does not like them. The South is seen as an existential threat; it is another Korean state, comprising two-thirds of the Korean nation, and has been a phenomenal success. The situation is different with China. Officially, both countries are driven by an eternal friendship, but this is based primarily on strategic considerations. Nevertheless, China provides a lifeline to North Korea.
Finally, I think in the last two decades, Pyongyang has toyed with the idea of a strategic alliance with the United States to counterbalance Chinese influence. But for domestic political reasons and because of the situation of human rights in North Korea, the Americans have never pushed this idea further. The North Koreans have realized that this strategic relationship was probably a dream.
The fundamental problem behind all of this is due to an accident of history. After the liberation of the peninsula from Japanese occupation in 1945, the division between the Soviets and Americans-for practical reasons-was not intended to be permanent. Today, there are two states, each of which thinks that it best represents the Korean nation and that it should be in charge of the affairs of the peninsula in its entirety. It is a zero-sum game. All issues about the current succession flow from this.
Elizabeth Buckner
CDDRL
What Would You Like 2.1 Billion People to Do for You Today?
txteagle is Boston-based company that enables mobile phone subscribers in the developing world to earn airtime by completing simple work. We have now integrated our compensation platform within the billing systems of over 220 mobile operators - providing 2.1 billion mobile phone subscribers with the ability for moderate economic empowerment. While originally focused on text-based tasks from the outsourcing industry, we have recently come to appreciate our distributed workforce as much more than a source of cheaper labor for the data-entry industry. Instead of simply facilitating labor arbitrage, we are now focused on leveraging a particular population's unique insights and local knowledge. Today our workforce provides services that could never be outsourced - services that require on-the-ground knowledge and insight. The scope of these types of services is rapidly expanding - ranging from conducting a 50-country survey commissioned by the United Nations, to helping a massive consumer goods corporation grow their sanitary pad distribution and marketing channels into rural markets, to localizing software for a major search engine, to verifying local businesses for the World Bank, to responding to surveys for international market and investment research firms, to conducting compensated awareness and engagement campaigns for many large, international brands.
The underlying value of our workforce comes from their unique community, their culture, their neighborhood, their social network, and their knowledge of the place where they live. We are excited to be continually discovering new ways to demonstrate this unique value they can provide to the rest of the world.
Nathan Eagle is the CEO of txteagle Inc. He holds faculty appointments at the MIT Media Laboratory and Northeastern University, and is an Omidyar Fellow at the Santa Fe Institute. His research involves engineering computational tools, designed to explore how the petabytes of data generated about human movements, financial transactions, and communication patterns can be used for social good. He holds a BS and two MS degrees from Stanford's School of Engineering; his PhD from the MIT Media Laboratory on Reality Mining was declared one of the '10 technologies most likely to change the way we live' by the MIT Technology Review. Recently, he was named one of the world's top mobile phone developers by Nokia and also elected to the TR35. His academic work has been featured in Science, Nature and PNAS, as well as in the mainstream press.
Wallenberg Theater