Indonesia conceptualised and aimed to adopt four principle roles after 2004 - being a voice for developing countries; being a regional leader; being an advocate for democratic and human rights; and being a bridge-builder. These roles, however, were by no means stable and were constantly being negotiated and contested. Karim analyses the contested nature of Indonesian foreign policy and the limits this places on consistency in enacting these roles. He highlights two drivers for such limitations - conflicting role conceptions and state fragmentation. He develops this argument based on four case studies of Indonesia's engagement in human rights governance and trade governance at both regional and global levels.
Read more