Shifting Actors and Strategy in Indonesia’s Disaster Diplomacy After Tsunami Aceh 2004

Diplomacy as a foreign policy instrument of certain states to attain its national interest has traditionally been the authority of the central government regarding to its adequate capability and authority than other actors. Indonesia has high rank on disaster vulnerability in the world. Disasters always have been more understood as lost factors than social capital factors. The 2004 earthquake and tsunami in Aceh was a monumental history how managing disasters became a source of productive political and economic diplomacy. This paper will explain how the issue of natural disasters drove some new actors especially local government which has disaster prone areas to participate on disaster diplomacy activities and develop new strategy to manage and capitalize natural disaster into positive social capital to solve social problems, economic, political and social culture in disaster prone areas. The result of article show transformation of actor perceptions on disasters will affect disaster governance.


Introduction
The state as an institution that holds sovereignty and assessing power in international politics faces increasingly complex global challenges. Issues such as transnational crime, environmental degradation, and scarcity of strategic commodities such as water and food and increasing intensity of disasters require changes in government policy strategies to address and manage these issues 1 .
In its development, both natural disaster and manmade disaster have placed it as a new strategic study in international relations, thus becoming an important concern in the framework of foreign policy of a country.
In Indonesia, the 2004 Aceh earthquake and tsunami have marked a new chapter on how disasters bring demands of changes in state responses and policies. 2 First, natural disasters are not only understood as domestic or local issue, but in some cases have become international or even transnational issues. This is characterized by the incidence of disasters in Indonesia -such as the Aceh Earthquake and Tsunami and the 2006 Bantul Earthquake -has become a concern of the international community especially when the media play a role in disseminating information and news of disasters throughout the world. 3 Second, disaster has the potential to mobilize international actors, not only the state either central or local government, but also individuals, NGOs, donor agencies who are involved in disaster mitigation efforts. The phenomenon of this movement cultivated an international solidarity movement that crossed the territorial borders of the country. 4 1 Ivan Simonovic, 'Relative Sovereignty of the Twenty First Century ', Hastings International & Comparative Law Review, 25 (2002) Third, the disaster potentially obscures the territorial borders and sovereignty of a country in the name of humanity. In the case of the 2004 Aceh Tsunami and earthquake, for example, provided opportunities for military equipment including warships and infrastructure of foreign countries commonly used in war to be a means of disaster management. The mobility of military equipment within a territory of a sovereign state also poses a new challenge for the state. 5 Fourth, the occurrence of a disaster has the potential to form a new construction of a disaster conception that may reflect the contestation of the interests of various actorsincluding the disaster-affected countries and the potential for disasters to be used as instruments of foreign policy. 6 These points out that disaster are no longer understood only as a natural phenomenon but a socio-political phenomenon that has many consequences for a country. Especially in recent years the intensity and impact of disasters shows a tendency to increasing over time. This paper seeks to see how the Government of Indonesia conducted disaster diplomacy, especially after the 2004 Aceh Earthquake and Tsunami, by observing the changes of actors and strategies. This article will discuss into 4 parts. The first will discusses about Indonesia as a most disaster prone area. The second part will explain about disaster and para diplomacy as a frame work of analysis, and will followed with part three which discusses about Indonesia disaster diplomacy practices and the last part will explain about the shifting actor and strategy on Indonesia disaster diplomacy.

History of Disaster
Disasters studies showed that disasters was an inseparable part of humanities history from classical to modern civilizations, on traditional to complex societies. It means that it is always happened in wherever and whenever. 7 Disaster studies captured range of disaster causes. There are two theories on explaining disaster happened. It was namely natural and man-made theories. 8 Natural theories relied on arguments how geological and topographic behavior and dynamics of weather and wind determined to disaster phenomena. 9 A number of countries become disasterprone areas because it lies in the geology called the ring of fire. Indonesia has become a country with high disaster hazard due to geological and topographic reasons such as the eruption of a number of mountains, and the collision of rock plates. 10 Indonesia also has latitude around the equator that causes wind, weather dynamics and then has implications for high degrees of rainfall. A number of disasters related to weather such as floods, landslides, typhoons, become a regular cycle in Indonesia.
Second, the man-made disaster theory perspective. Disaster is caused by political policies that it is discriminate to existence of "the others" groups or communities. The theory was developed by Robert K Malthus in the form of a war policy as a means of protecting the existence of humanity. 11 Humanitarian realism of Malthus's developed further in the view of Darwin's theory which is then modified into social Darwinism theory which has implications for humanitarian disasters, especially inferior groups. Narratives about war instrumentalism, genocide, ethnic cleansing, and colonization reflect the face of humanitarian disasters from classical to modern. 12 Third, combined man-made and natural disaster theory is based on the argument that disaster arises because of policy governance and led to ecological degrade. Industrialization policy in the history of humanity has done massive engineering and exploration of nature. Exploration of nature results accumulative and massive damage, meanwhile the ability of nature to carry out natural conservation processes requires a very long time. 13 One very popular example is the global warming disaster. Global warming is a very recent event, and is not yet known to the nonindustrial community. Global warming is caused by the pro-industrialization policy by using fossil primary energy as a driving energy. A very complex problem related to the use of fossil energy is the residue from the industrialization process in the form of increased levels of CO2 (carbon), which is followed by a reduction in levels of O2 (oxygen) in the air. 14 If this event goes on accumulatively and massively it will cause the ozone depletion phenomenon. This is what will then trigger the surface temperature of the earth will increase 11 Evelin Lindner, which can then lead to the melting of the ice sheet at the North Pole.
Not only that, global warming also affects the dynamics of climate and complex weather, which then triggers floods, crop failure. This phenomenon is also capable of causing famine, various endemic diseases. Even for the Copenhagen school will result in a security event which became known as securitization. 15

Disaster Diplomacy Discourses
The disaster diplomacy discourse was popularized by Ilan Kelman, a scholar from Germany. The idea of disaster diplomacy is inspired by the management of disaster events that occur in developing countries, Bangladesh. 16 There is creativity and intelligence in seeing disasters, not just physical events, but how to manage disaster information, which actually becomes more substantive in disaster narratives. Disaster information governance will determine how disaster events are addressed by disaster stakeholders. Government and mass media are two groups of disaster stakeholders who can play an important role in how disaster events are reported. 17 The main focus is how disaster information management can effectively reduce disaster risk.
Disaster diplomacy in the next stage starts to talk about how to capitalize on disaster events for purposes outside of the disaster itself. Disaster events can change political and economic choices. This is related to growing awareness to share experiences and burdens towards parties who are victims of disaster events. Changes in thinking towards other parties allow the opening of communication channels that have been distorted. 18 Once again Ilan Kelman was able to explain well a number of disaster events and then be associated with political events. Although recognized by Ilan Kelman, that disaster is not the only determinant factor for a number of acute political reconciliations in a number of countries, such as Indonesia with the Free Aceh Movement, Cuba and the United States, and India-Pakistan, Turkey and Greek. 19 If during this disaster diplomacy study has been able to explain and facilitate the resolution of past problems as discussed by Ilan Kelman, there is a new narrative in reading disaster diplomacy. Ratih Herningtyas and Surwandono view that disaster events can be managed to become social capital for future disaster management, or even that disaster events can open opportunities for cooperation between disaster stakeholders outside of disaster issues. 20 This is where then gave birth to a more accelerated discourse on disaster management. Disaster diplomacy is not limited to being understood as management when a disaster occurs, but also post-disaster management occurs. This condition causes disaster management to be more comprehensive, systematic and long-term. In this context then disaster management touches on the issue of resilience in dealing with disasters. 21 This issue of resilience requires more actor participation. If so far the actor's diplomacy is very state centric, so in the context of building resilience, the State must decentralize a number of authorities to other actors such as sub-government which later became known as paradiplomacy, or delegate to civilian human organizations. 22 This multi-faced disaster diplomacy discourse will make disaster diplomacy performance more intensive and extensive through disaster adaptive governance. 23

Analysis and Discussion
Indonesian government was not introduced term disaster diplomacy in the Law of Disaster Number 24 Years 2007, although Indonesia had experienced conducted disaster diplomacy in different context and periods along in Indonesian history. In the era of Sukarno, for example, Indonesia as a newly independent country need international recognition from other countries.
Unfortunately, under Sukarno's anti-Neocolonialism policy, the image of Indonesia as a country that is less friendly with Western countries had influenced international perception. Furthermore, most of western countries tried to be demolished Indonesia's image by calling the symptoms of food shortage 21 Herningtyas, Ratih, Surwandono in some parts of Indonesia as a famine. The opportunity to restore Indonesia's image and prestige arose when India suffered a food crisis and Indonesia, who cited as experiencing famine, helped by sending tons of rice to the Indian government. This diplomacy is effective enough to ward off bad news of hunger in Indonesia. 24 The concept of disaster diplomacy became popular in Indonesia after the 2004 Aceh Tsunami mainly popularized by BNPB Chairman Syamsul Maarif. According to him, after the 2004 Aceh Tsunami, Indonesia experienced significant progress in the management of disaster issues such as in the legalization of Law No. 24/2007 on disaster management, developing disaster resilience through strengthening communities and institutions and disaster mitigation. This progress leads to new understanding about disaster diplomacy. 25 Diplomacy as the primary means of the State in its relations with other states is strongly dominated by the role of the government along with the central bureaucracy and issues that tend to be high politics and economy. The Aceh earthquake and tsunami transform the central government of Indonesia to evaluate the performance of disaster management. It is too state centric and natural disaster is no longer commonly regarded as a domestic disaster that limited to territory of the state sovereignty. Disaster tends to invite the participation of international actors, such as foreign countries, donors, NGOs and even foreign individuals who want to help the disaster management process in Indonesia. 27 The presence of various international actors in the name of solidarity and humanity makes the government difficult to resist. Moreover, the tsunami of Aceh was resulting in massive casualties and infrastructure damage. The image and capacity of the State are at stake so that disaster management is a top priority to be evaluated and improved so that it can become an important means for the State. 28 The earthquake and tsunami that occurred in Aceh showed a tendency that all the decisions or the management of natural disasters concentrated in Jakarta, so it resulted in a delay of assistance and services needed by society victims of natural disasters as long bureaucratic implications. The process of reducing the impact of devastating natural disasters which are both in the short-term context for the provision of medical services and food to earthquake survivors, and long term reconstruction of residential services and public utilities, has a long-term impact. On a broader scale, natural disasters brought some social problems, economic, political, and security very seriously at the national level as a result of political, economic, social and security resources are concentrated to the affected areas. Dependence of the local government to the central will only exacerbate the capacity of local governments to manage disaster issues, because many stakeholders in natural disasters will easily accuse it as "the government is not responsive".
The problem also often appears related to international humanitarian aid missions regarding the presence of hidden (hidden agenda) as part of aid, either on behalf of state or international NGOs. Some of the problems that arise related to this issue are: first, concern to the intervention of foreign powers as a result the number of foreign troops into the disaster area and use it for strategic needs and espionage that will ultimately threaten national security. Second, fears of children trafficking, victims of disasters are not managed properly.
Third, there are fears of penetration of Christian missionaries to propagate a particular religion to victims of disasters that can disrupt social stability and domestic politics. Fourth, political issues related to humanitarian aid provided by countries do not have diplomatic relations. 30 The case came to light when there are a number of logistics, which is managed by SATKORLAK in West Sumatra, are the official symbols of the state of Israel. In this sense, diplomacy must play an important role to overcome the circumstances, but it must be difficult to conduct it if all the activities must be done by central government. 31

Risk
Reduction, 16 From several studies and documents conducted by the author, earthquake and tsunami in Aceh has led to changing of political behavior in diplomacy. First, In Aceh case the role of disaster diplomacy is directly done by the central government. Aceh's Local Government is paralysis either capacity or technical, so the process of disaster diplomacy tends to run in Jakarta, not in Aceh. In the case of natural disaster after Tsunami 2004, the Government of Indonesia constructed the synergy with the local government to manage natural disaster issues. Local Government of Yogyakarta for example, both in provincial level and urban district level get significant role in disaster diplomacy practice. Precisely the central government uses Yogyakarta as the basis of disaster diplomacy in order to get widely responses from the international society. 32 Second, disaster diplomacy in Aceh tend to use sympathy reasons, which recently known as "crying diplomacy", besides institutionalized reasons. This case is reflected from the respond of central government, which The President declared the petition of assistance towards International society by expose humanity and massive damage infrastructure problems. By exposing the suffering and misery of Acehnese people, hoping that it will provoke empathy of international society to involved in settlement of humanitarian issue in Aceh. Then, this scheme made massive aid goes to Aceh, but those aid were not accompanied by adequate management which causing social, economic, and security problems. It makes the Acehnese people seriously depend on it. 33 <https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-sends-aid-toindonesia-following-earthquake-tsunami-report/>. 32 'JK: Penanganan Bencana Tsunami Aceh Contoh Bagi Dunia', 2015 <https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/201503141 80644-20-39133/jk-penanganan-bencana-tsunamiaceh-contoh-bagi-dunia>. 33 Akmal Saputra, 'Sosiologi Bencana: Sebuah Refleksi Pasca Gempa Dan Tsunami Di Aceh', Local and the central government in the case of natural disaster in Yogyakarta are trying to develop the institutionalized reasons diplomacy, which characterized by the management of disaster diplomacy that was more programmed and systematic, so aids come because the practice of disaster diplomacy do not make many social, economy, and security problems. The practice of institutionalized reasons of disaster diplomacy is positively connected with rapidly recovery of people in Yogyakarta compared to Aceh. 34 The management of institutionalized reasons of disaster diplomacy makes humanitarian agencies can play longer and maximal to run their humanity mission. For example, agent JRF (Javanese Reconstruction Funds) still run the program in Yogyakarta until 5 years after. Also NGO, IOM, Catholic Relief, Islamic Relief, sent their representative in Yogyakarta longer and more productive. 35 Third, disaster diplomacy in Aceh is used more by the central government to solve political security problems in Aceh rather than social, economic, and education. As a study that conducted by Kelman, the Government of Indonesia and agent of International peace use the case of natural disaster in Aceh as an important factor for political settlement in Aceh through Helsinki Agreement 2005. Post negotiation in Helsinki Agreement 2005, made political separatism, Free Aceh Movement (GAM) cases were relatively could be solved comprehensively. But the central government as well as Local Government of Aceh was not much applying disaster diplomacy to increase welfare quality of Acehnese people through Jurnal Sosiologi USK, 9.1 (2016), 55-66 <http://www.jurnal.unsyiah.ac.id/JSU/article/view/92 61/7245>. 34 Joakim and Wismer. 35 Hesselman and Lane. massive cooperation and international investment mechanism. 36 It is characterized by the small number of investment and international cooperation between Local Government of Aceh and international stakeholder to increase the number of humanity index (HDI) of Acehnese people. Post natural disaster, Aceh is not growing as province that has progress in education, economy, and social, therefore 6 years after natural disaster, problems of security reemerged, like; armed terrorism groups are everywhere, Human Development Index (HDI) of Acehnese people in 2004 is 6,2 and in 2010 there is only 6,5. 37 Disaster diplomacy in Yogyakarta is more apply, which by natural disaster they create international cooperation with stakeholder abroad. The scheme of natural disaster diplomacy that use by the Local Government of Yogyakarta tend to copy the disaster diplomacy used by China's Government. As a study done by Weizhun, China's economic growth have significant progress within 10 years and it cannot be denied that this is one of the effort from Chinese Government capitalization to manage natural disaster as tools to create international cooperation with countries that doubt China's policy. 38 The Local Government of Yogyakarta, both in province level and urban district are done with international cooperation in the case of social, economy, education, culture with many countries like; Japan, China, India, South Korea, and Singapore. Those are the cooperation 36  Government to Government, (G to G), in the form of sister city as well as sister province concept, also in the form of Government to Society (G to S) in the form of culture and educational exchange and the last, Government to manufacture (G to M) in the form of plating investment to drive economic wheel in Yogyakarta. The institutionalized reasons of disaster diplomacy in Yogyakarta is positively correlated against the increasing index of humanitarian community in Yogyakarta from 6.7 in 2005 become 7.2 in 2010. 39 The Yogyakarta local government was expanding the area of disaster cooperation with a number of parties. The idea related to disaster cooperation by the regional government was actually carried out by the Yogyakarta government through the cooperation between the Yogyakarta government and Kyoto Prefecture and Yamanashi in Japan 40 and Chiang Ma, Thailand. 41 The local government Yogyakarta also called for sister universities to deal with disaster issues. Gadjah Mada University got the opportunity to conduct collaborative research on disaster management with number of university in Japan. The exchange of information on disaster management from Japan is able to strengthen disaster stakeholder preparedness in Yogyakarta.
The transformation of knowledge on disaster management from Japan made the Japanese prime minister amazed. Indonesia is able to become a strong country in disaster management. Indonesia's assistance to Japan when Japan was experiencing a catastrophe at the Fukhusima nuclear reactor leak due to the earthquake shows that cooperation between Japan and Indonesia has intensified.
The process of decentralization of disaster diplomacy in the case of disaster in Yogyakarta received recognition from the United Nations. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono received an award from the United Nations related to systematic disaster management based on the Indonesian Tsunami Early Warning Center (INA TEWS). Some countries even visited Indonesia to learn about disaster management.
The Yogyakarta government also called for sister universities to deal with disaster issues. Gadjah Mada University got opportunity to conduct collaborative research on disaster management. The exchange and sharing of information on disaster management from Japan is able to strengthen disaster stakeholder preparedness in Yogyakarta. 42 The transformation of knowledge about disaster management from Japan made the Japanese prime minister show his admiration. Even Indonesia is able to become a strong country in disaster management. Indonesia's assistance to Japan when Japan was experiencing a catastrophe at the Fukhusima nuclear reactor leak due to the earthquake shows that cooperation between Japan and Indonesia has intensified.
The process of decentralization of disaster diplomacy in the case of disaster in Yogyakarta received recognition from the United Nations. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono received an award from the United 42 C Brassard, DW Giles, and AM Howitt, 'Natural Disaster Management in the Asia-Pacific', Springer <http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-4-431-55157-7.pdf>. Nations related to systematic disaster management based on the Indonesian Tsunami Early Warning Center (INA TEWS). Some countries even visited Indonesia to learn about disaster management. 43 Decentralization in disaster diplomacy was also given to a number of humanitarian organizations engaged in the field of disaster. Humanitarian social organizations are able to establish synergy with the government, as well as a number of international partners in managing national disasters. Even MDMC is one of the organizations that get the trust of the government to coordinate and distribute community and Indonesian government assistance in the case of humanitarian disasters in Nepal in 2015 44 , and disaster in Myanmar in 2017. 45 43 'JK: Penanganan Bencana Tsunami Aceh Contoh Bagi Dunia'. 44 'Bersama BNPB, Tim MDMC Siapkan Operasional RS Darurat Di Nepal', 2015 <http://www.muhammadiyah.or.id/id/news-4513detail-bersama-bnpb-tim-mdmc-siapkan-operasionalrs-darurat-di-nepal.html>. 45 'Muhammadiyah Aid Untuk Rohingya Terkumpul Sementara Rp 3,3 M', 2017 <https://www.republika.co.id/berita/duniaislam/wakaf/17/09/10/ow2dpy319-muhammadiyahaid-untuk-rohingya-terkumpul-sementara-rp-33-m>.

Conclusion
Disaster diplomacy as an instrument for achieving national interests needs to be systematically institutionalized in a number of disaster policy regulations in Indonesia. Disaster governance requires comprehensive disaster management that it can mobilize domestic and international sources simultaneously for reducing disaster risk.
Decentralization of actor diplomacy is a must through giving more opportunities to subgovernments and humanitarian civil organizations to participate in managing disaster diplomacy. It is a in-lining with improving the capacity of actors in order to disaster diplomacy can run effective and productive.