| ID | 194109 |
| Title Proper | Middle-power behaviours |
| Other Title Information | Australia’s status-quoist/Lockean and Indonesia’s reformist/Kantian approaches to crises of legitimacy in the Indo-Pacific |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Harijanto, Christian |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | This article maps the behaviours of two middle powers, Australia and Indonesia, as a response to the emergence and evolution of the Indo-Pacific concept. The background for this analysis is the emergence and development of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ concept as a response to crises of legitimacy enveloping the region and how countries in the region, including middle powers, respond to it. Using a minimalist definition which I have developed of a middle power as a country with a middle level of power capabilities and a penchant for cooperation, this article develops a framework based on two dimensions of outcome (ranging from status-quoist to reformist outlooks) and process (ranging from Lockean to Kantian strategies) to facilitate a more open-ended approach towards looking at middle-power behaviours beyond the common categorisation of traditional/emerging, and Western/non-Western. Using Australia’s 2017 Foreign Policy White Paper and 2023 National Defence: Defence Strategic Review, and Indonesia’s 2015 Defence White Paper and 2019 ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific, this article concludes that while Australia is exhibiting a status-quoist/Lockean approach, Indonesia is demonstrating a reformist/Kantian approach towards the Indo-Pacific. The outcome-process dimension framework developed in this article is useful as a tool to map other middle power behaviours in various contexts. |
| `In' analytical Note | Australian Journal of International Affairs Vol. 78, No.1; Feb 2024: p.40-57 |
| Key Words | Middle Power ; Australian Foreign Policy ; Indonesian Foreign Policy ; Indo-Pacific ; Crises of legitimacy |