There are two broad views of Indonesia amongst Australians. For the one-and-a-half million Australians who visit Bali each year, it is a party venue. For them, the beach resorts and the local nightlife of Kuta are the experiences of the nation.  A few have visited other places, such as Lombok, but their knowledge of our northern neighbour is limited and peripheral. The other view was reflected in an email from a friend a few years ago. ‘Aren’t you worried by having the most populous Islamic nation in the world on your doorstep?’ Each view is a caricature of the reality.

Most Australians don’t think about Indonesia much at all. There is very little media coverage, apart from times when adverse events occur, such as the bombings twenty years ago.

Most would not have known that the country had presidential elections last week, let alone be able to name the candidates. Four decades ago, Indonesian was taught in our schools; today it has mostly disappeared. In 1978, Christopher Koch’s acclaimed novel, The Year of Living Dangerously – later a successful film – explored the events and tensions in the nation during the Sukarno era. Few Australians have visited Indonesia, outside of Bali, let alone have an appreciation of the nation. I doubt if any members of parliament – apart from ministers – have an ongoing relationship with their counterparts in Jakarta.

One force for good is the thousands of young Indonesians who have studied in Australia. Visiting Indonesia a few years ago, I participated in a series of receptions for former students who had studied here. They were positive and supportive of good relations between our nations, but much more needs to be done. The New Colombo Plan, which awards scholarships to Australians to study in Asia, is limited, with just 150 scholarships for the entire region this year.

For the past decade, under the leadership of Joko Widodo, the relationship has been  positive. Equally, his predecessor, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, was supportive of the association.

That marks two decades of good relations, involving seven Australian prime ministers.

Like many nations in Asia, Indonesia has gradually moved from its authoritarian, militaristic background to a democratic state. That progress has been slow at times and subject to internal tensions which remain. Balancing a range of Islamic voices and secular government has also been challenging. Whether the democratic trajectory continues is the most significant question arising from the election.

Last week’s elections mark a new chapter in relations between the two nations. A new president will bring new priorities and interests. Indonesia’s president-elect, Prabowo Subianto, is an enigmatic character. The 72-year-old from an elite Javanese clan was easily elected, despite warnings about his past. The former defence minister, a son-in-law of the autocratic President Suharto, was dismissed from the military in 1998. It was alleged that he led a unit that had committed atrocities in East Timor and West Papua, and kidnapped and tortured activists, resulting in the disappearance of democracy supporters.

There is little doubt that outgoing President Joko Widodo played an important role in the election of Prabowo. His eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka was Prabowo’s running mate, ensuring a continuing influence of the current president. Whether the younger Widodo is capable of stepping-up from a city mayor to a national leader remains to be seen. Joko, who had explored unsuccessfully how he might obtain a third term, seems determined to retain a significant influence over the direction of the world’s most populous democracy. Prabowo has promised to govern for all, ‘whatever their tribes, ethnicities, race, religion, whatever their social or economic background…. Great nations always look ahead, embracing their future,’ he said after being elected.

The home for 270 million people, Indonesia is a very diverse country with its five main islands among thousands in total. It is a nation of contrasts and differing aspirations. Separatist movements remain – especially in Aceh and West Papua. These tensions are not about to disappear. Other than Beijing, Jakarta should be the most important diplomatic post for Australia. Yet Washington and London remain the glittering prizes for former cabinet ministers.

Australia was a strong supporter of an independent Indonesia in 1945, a factor not forgotten by Prabowo. We co-sponsored – with India – Indonesia’s membership of the United Nations in 1949. In 2018-19, our countries completed two agreements with each other – a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership and the Indonesia Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. These have the potential over the longer term to transform the relationship. As Australia’s then ambassador, Gary Quinlan said, ‘A resilient, prosperous Indonesia plays a central role in shaping the emerging Indo-Pacific regional order.’

A strong relationship with Indonesia is in Australia’s long-term strategic interests. In recent years, China has turned its attention to the nation, investing heavily. Along with the activities of the CCP elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific, this activity requires constant monitoring, and if necessary, matching.

Parliament has a much greater role to play. Each year, delegations of Australian MPs visit a number of Asean nations, and separately the Asean annual meeting. Instead of solidifying knowledge and connections, different people participate in the two delegations, and generally never a second time.

Parliament should consider allocating these delegations to the ongoing members of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade committee so its members can cement their knowledge and, importantly, relationships with Indonesian counterparts.

It is shameful that so few Australian MPs have a personal relationship with their Asian counterparts. The diplomatic role of Australian parliamentarians needs to be explored and expanded, not left to the individual initiative of a few.