Indonesian Foreign minister Hassan Wirayuda was correct when he said earlier this week that the establishment of a regional human rights commission was inevitable.

“We can’t become the ASEAN Community that we have envisioned ourselves to be until and unless the promotion and protection of human rights is pervasive in our region,” he said during a roundtable discussion on human rights   at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

There can be no doubt that ASEAN is lagging behind other regional groups in addressing human rights concerns, with  African, American, and European countries already having long-established rights commissions.

We welcome the Foreign Ministry’s renewed commitment to human rights as part of the diplomatic agenda.

As the world’s third greatest democracy — in size, not quality — the values which are now the defining pillars of this society should become a platform of the nation’s diplomacy.

We have detected such a trend in our diplomatic rhetoric particularly over the past year.

The foreign minister has decried the lack of democratic progress in ASEAN’s “problem child”, Myanmar,   and expressed regret at the undemocratic change of leadership in Thailand.

While we believe the Foreign Ministry still sits on the fence on many issues related to human rights, it is starting   to lean in the right direction.

It is now the duty of civil society to compel them to get off the fence. This evolution cannot be left to the slow machinery of bureaucracy and stodgy diplomatic propriety.

Efforts to establish a regional human rights mechanism have failed for 13 years. Even Hassan continues to insist that a gradual approach is best.

We fully comprehend the limitations faced by Indonesian diplomats working within the rigid protocols of ASEAN.

But how much more gradual can ASEAN be when after 13 years, there is little to show in terms of progress toward a  rights mechanism? Education and promotion of human rights is an important element, but protection is just as integral. At present, regional efforts on the former are scarce, and on the latter nonexistent.

We understand that values do not change overnight, but it is also an inalienable fact that human rights promotion and protection are integrally packaged. One cannot begin to engage in the first and delay the other to some point when it is deemed politically viable.

Hence, while the Foreign Ministry sees fit to follow the winding track of ASEANism, conducting studies and forming committees and a working group on this issue, it should also be blunt in its bilateral dialog. This is especially the case with fellow ASEAN members. As neighbors and friends living in a community we should be able to be more open with each other.

There has to be a breakthrough in the coming year which will show that Indonesia is committed beyond the flurry of headlines and big speeches.

A breakthrough which does not have to upset the carefully constructed framework of cooperation within ASEAN, but with enough grit to indicate this country is serious about the issue.

The Indonesian people are striving and struggling, and some are dying, so we that can firmly establish a system in which the dignity and rights of citizens are paramount.

Without imposing our views, we should ask what is the point of such an effort if we continue to condone, and in some ways support, contrary practices by our closest friends and neighbors.

No one would be friends with someone who was openly abusing his or her family. Should the state not live by equal principles? If Indonesian officials refuse to be more decisive with countries like Myanmar, for example, they should not shy away from engaging in dialog with opposition groups within that country.

Such a move does not imply support, but it does show recognition that in a democratic system there is a respect for alternative voices in society.

We implore our officials to at least begin concerted efforts such as these that would infuse some dignity into the foreign policy of a democratic state.

Without that, our democratic credentials and human rights rhetoric will plunge into embarrassment — the kind of embarrassment which leads people to brush aside statements about regional human rights concerns.

That would strengthen the skepticism which perceives these concerns as a public diplomacy ploy and an afterthought.  Especially since a planned dialog to comment on the human rights proposals to be submitted to ASEAN heads of state was only held after the original summit was canceled.