Comments by new U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell have stirred some controversy in Australia. During his confirmation hearings, Powell said that the United States would let Australia take the lead in Indonesia, "as they have done so well in that troubled country." Critics saw this as evidence that the Bush administration will seek to badge Australia as its deputy sheriff and point it at Indonesia. Such a policy would serve none of the parties involved.
In relation to Indonesia, Australian and American interests, while congruent, are not identical. The essential strategic interest that they share in relation to Indonesia is the integrity of the archipelago and maritime passage through the straits that link the Indian and Pacific oceans. That is also a vital interest for Japan, America's key Asian ally, because of its reliance on oil from the Middle East. But for reasons of geography, Indonesia looms much larger for Australia than it does for the U.S. So Australia cannot frame its relationship with its most important neighbor solely within the context of its alliance with America.
Differences arose between Australia and America over the handling of the political fallout from Indonesia's economic crisis in 1998. Neither country managed this as deftly as it might have. The Clinton team saw President Suharto merely as the Philippines' Ferdinand Marcos writ large. So it seized the chance to get rid of him, using the International Monetary Fund as its instrument.