Indonesia strongly believes that the relationship between development and human rights is vital. For evidence of its strength, look to: Indonesia’s rising literacy rate, 90.5 percent for the urban population, 77.4 percent for the rural population; the rise in average life expectancy, from 45 years in 1967 to 63 years in 1994; and the significant drop in the infant mortality rate, from 145 per 1,000 to 58 per 1,000 over the same period. These and others are all the result of the phenomenal economic growth Indonesia has experienced in the last 30 years.

However, any approach to human rights issues not motivated by a sincere desire to protect these rights, but rather disguised by political purposes, or worse, serving as a pretext to wage a political campaign against another country, cannot be justified. Indonesia, therefore, cannot accept the linkage of human rights to economic and development cooperation, trade or other issues by attaching human rights implementation as a political condition to such cooperation. Such a linkage only detracts from the value of both. Leaders of the Non-Aligned Movement, during their tenth summit in Jakarta in 1992, strongly opposed this linkage, stating:

It is now generally accepted that all categories of human rights - civil, political, economic, social and cultural, the rights of the individual and the rights of the community, the society and the nation - are interrelated and indivisible. This implies that the promotion and protection of these rights should be undertaken in an integral and balanced manner and that inordinate emphasis on one category of human rights over another cannot be justified. Likewise, in assessing the human rights conditions of countries, and of developing countries in particular, the international community should take into account the situation in relation to all categories of human rights. The attempt to link human rights to humanitarian and development aid is counter to the true concept of human rights.

Indonesia has taken a public stance against such linkage in several instances, including President Soeharto’s May 26, 1997 letter to U.S. President Clinton, where he cited "wholly unjustified criticisms in the United States Congress against Indonesia which are linked to its participation in the International Military Education and Training (IMET) program and the planned purchase of the F-16 planes" as one of the factors that led to Indonesia’s decision to forego its participation in the IMET as well as its purchase of nine F-16 planes from the U.S. Government. President Soeharto added that with the linkage removed, "the relationship between the United States and Indonesia would move forward to a new and even sounder level of cooperation based on mutual respect, mutual benefit and non-interference in each other’s domestic affairs."

In still another instance, in 1992, the Government rejected over US$90 million in development aid from the Netherlands, citing attempted linkage of the aid to human rights issues. According to a letter from the Government of Indonesia, "...relations between the two nations have deteriorated sharply as a consequence of the reckless use of development assistance as an instrument of intimidation or as a tool of threatening Indonesia."

In Indonesia, criticism about human rights, provided it is accurate, proportionate, balanced and fair, is welcomed as a means of continuing on the path of improvement and progress. But the linkage of the issue in an attempt to politicize human rights accomplishes exactly the opposite of what true human rights advocates promote: the continued improvement of human rights for all, regardless of race, country or creed.

Former United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali commented on the occasion of the 1992 Human Rights Day that:

Simply put, to link human rights with development, or humanitarian aid is discrimination; it is ultimately detrimental to the continued improvement of human rights and it must never be accepted.

Indonesia believes that the way in which concerns on human rights are expressed at the international level has, so far, failed to reflect the immense political, economic, social and cultural diversity of the world. When this diversity is disregarded, as it often is, imbalances occur in such forms as politicization, selectivity, double standards and discrimination. As a result, some countries have become the target of unfair censure and trial by prejudicial publicity, while others escape deserved criticism for reasons that have nothing at all to do with human rights.

It would help the cause of human rights if these imbalances were addressed through an integrated and balanced approach that takes into account the diversity of the societies in which human rights are to be observed and implemented, the indivisibility and non-selectivity of all human rights, and the inherent relationship between development, democracy, social justice and the universal enjoyment of human rights.