Overcoming Fear and Building Trust:
How Emotions Play Roles in Response to COVID-19 in Indonesia
Hana Naufanita
Transparency and empathy are perceived as the essence of building public trust that lead to effective measures in combating COVID-19. As transparency has been discussed broadly, discussion about empathy in the political arena is rather silent. Empathy is just one of emotions expressed during our response to the unprecedented pandemic. Fear of death, distrust of the government, worry of public chaos, anxious of unemployment and economic crisis are other emotions generated by COVID-19. The words take courage, do not panic, and be kind are several speeches delivered by world leaders to build trust and overcome fear.
COVID-19 is an entirely new challenge. Lack of knowledge on the novel coronavirus has caused global confusion. No country is immune to the virus, hence many people, including policy makers, behave variously. Some policy makers might get their conception right, some end in misconception. This essay examines how emotions play roles to understand such behaviours by emphasizing state-society relations amid COVID-19. Understanding the psychological aspects of decision making and delivery of information related to COVID-19 is important to determine how people will behave towards certain policies (such as lockdown and physical distancing).
Emotions, Rationality and Policy
According to American Psychology Association, emotion is a complex reaction pattern, involving experiential, behavioural, and physiological elements.[1] In society, emotion is often narrowly associated with anger, which is bad, weak and irrational. Most philosophers and scholars also perceived emotions as opposition and subordinate to rationality. Emotion is all about consequences, mistakes and misconceptions. This is what Jonathan Mercer identifies as epiphenomenal and a mistake. In fact, psychologists and neuroscientists found that emotion determines our worldview and helps us make decisions as it is intertwined with our cognition (emotions as rational). It is also an efficient strategy to obtain material advantages (emotion as strategy). Although this approach is rather instrumentalist, emotion is recognized as part of the solutions rather than only causing problems.[2]
In the decision making process, emotion helps us to better understand how actors will frame information, constitute a sense of identity and political community, and healing community after trauma.[3] This implies how emotion is not limited to individual beings since it has a social dimension, for example when people can relate to collective situations such as the transboundary COVID-19. In this case, since a nation-state is an imagined political community run by humans, state behavior can also be identified through emotional aspects.
Furthermore, using emotions is important to identify how society judge policy. According to Richard D French, ordinary citizens express their judgment based on the meaning they attach to it, rather than simply a rigorous rational analysis. They emphasize their experience when they react to policy. While scientific based policy remains crucial to balance competing principles and negotiate interests, sensitivity of emotion is also important to get a lively sense of the way citizens will read and react to the policy.[4] This implies whether they will obey or disobey the policy made by the government.
Indonesia’s Series of Misconceptions
In the first two months of 2020, Indonesia rejected the fact that the COVID-19 case would appear in Indonesia. Minister of Health of Indonesia, Terawan Putranto ensured the public that COVID-19 was unlikely to emerge in Indonesia and the government did not cover things up.[5] Hence, he appealed Indonesian to just enjoy, eat-well and keep praying. Series of denial statements also made by other ministers by jokingly saying that Indonesians are immune to COVID-19 since they have ‘restrictive licensing to bring it home’ and love to eat Nasi Kucing.[6] Eventually, the unempathetic jokes stopped until the first and second case were revealed on 3 March.
After the announcement of national emergency on 14 March, President Joko Widodo admitted that the government was hiding some information as they feared the information would stir panic and generate stigma towards patients.[7] A day before, another misperception was made by entitling 188 Indonesian crew members of Dream World Cruise as Corona Immunity Ambassadors in order to inspire the rest of Indonesian citizens to live healthy and well-immune.
According to Drone Emprit’s analysis on public’s perception and emotions towards COVID-19 mitigation in Indonesia (data taken from 7 to 14 March 2020), trust issues dominated Indonesian citizens’ emotional perception, followed by surprise, anger and fear (Graphic 1).[8] Trust was related to data accuracy and transparency. This data shows President Jokowi’s misconception regarding data transparency. When citizens are afraid, they tend to seek transparency. Without it, the government has lost public trust. Meanwhile, surprise referred to a dramatic increase in the death toll. Anger was targeted at parties who politicized the COVID-19 situation, such as buzzers and politicians. Not only related to trust towards government, fear also described citizens’ helplessness for not comprehending the current situation.
Graphic 1. Public Emotions on Coronavirus in Indonesia
Source: Drone Emprit (2020).
The responses show how trust issues become the core problem between state and society in Indonesia. This kind of behaviour between the two does not simply appear in COVID-19 situation. Acknowledging that government-society relations in Indonesia have been in tension for several years in Jokowi’s leadership. However, this does not mean that Indonesia is helpless after all. In society, although stigmatization towards COVID-19 patients, death bodies rejection and civil disobedience still exist; Indonesian civil society has shown that the embodiment of gotong royong (the spirit of cooperation) remains strong through volunteerism and crowdfunding campaigns.[9]. Therefore, compassion and resilience among society still exist during this difficult time. Beyond the idea of nation-state and its governance.
Beyond Indonesia: The Constructive Roles of Emotions in Mitigating COVID-19
There might be no one-size-fits-all policy to combat COVID-19. Nevertheless, taking lessons learned is surely valuable in this situation. One of lessons learned Indonesia can take is on how to be more sensitive to emotions in communicating the coronavirus. There are several ways to use emotional approach to overcome fear and build trust as the essence to establish successful policy:
First, emotions raise collective identity among government and society. Through psychological friendly discourse, world leaders aim to reduce anxiety among citizens who do not know what kind of enemy they are facing. For countries like Singapore and South Korea, they already have the memory of facing previous coronavirus (SARS and MERS) hence they tend to be more ready. Although the characteristics of COVID-19 is uncertain, various policies have been relatively effective to flatten the curve. Gil Park from Daegu University mentioned that sensitivity is an important factor, meaning that the government must have a compassionate communication strategy. Compassion should be able to handle the public’s fear and anger which can be done through fact-based information gathered and delivered by experts and private sectors.[10]
In South Korean society, they apply the social distancing policy in family units for the fear of becoming the virus spreader which implies their compassion and consciousness for not blaming others as spreaders. Opposite attitude emerges in Singapore. Although the government shows great performance in providing public facilitation and promoting public compliance, some Singaporean scapegoated foreign workers through the WhatsApp message chain.
Successful story is not limited to high income countries like Singapore and South Korea. Take Vietnam for example. According to Minh Vu and Bich T. Tran, the secret to Vietnam’s low number of COVID-19 cases is a proactive reaction through empirical policy and nationalism narratives. Vietnam framed the virus as a common foreign enemy.[11] Emotion has framed the fear of COVID-19 into a unified community. Vietnamese’s nationalism (which I consider as a socio-political dimension of emotions) approach to fight COVID-19 is implemented in the right context. Nationalism, without ignoring the importance of transparency, became the strategy to create collective humanitarian action to curb the spread of the virus.
Second, emotions construct women’s representation. New Zealand’s Prime Minister has been praised for her science-based and empathetic risk communication ability. Ever since the Christchurch attack, Jacinda Ardern is well-known for her femininity power that is empathetic, decisive and naturally down to earth. Another example is Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen’s style that is warm and authoritative. Both leaders’ traits and representation of what women leadership look like have created trust and compliance among their citizens and even political opponents. This construction leads to another hypothesis that female leaders have special touch in managing the COVID-19.[12] Excluding another Asia Pacific women leader, President Aung San Suu Kyi.
Third, emotions become a strategy to obtain material advantages for COVID-19 mitigation and recovery through global solidarity discourse. In the first months of COVID-19 confusion, states acted in man for himself behaviour. As Stephen Walt wrote, COVID-19 reifies the importance of state and makes effective cooperation difficult to achieve.[13] But, after getting more insight about the externalities of COVID-19, states need international cooperation. This behaviour shows how foreign policy makers were surprised by the magnitude of the novel virus as much as the society. For example, ASEAN has managed to catch up the pandemic situation with the spirit of solidarity through the Special ASEAN-China Foreign Ministers’ Meeting on Coronavirus Disease, ASEAN Special Summit and ASEAN Plus Three Special Summit. However, the platforms are still proposals for material advantages such as research and development, economic recovery package, medical and food supplies. Solidarity, in this sense, is an instrumentalist discourse.
Reflections and Way Forward for Indonesia
Drowning in destructive emotions towards each other is counterproductive to curb the spread of the COVID-19. Indonesian government and society should be able to turn such emotions as part of anticipative measures and build resiliency. Emotions should enforce motivation to cope up with COVID-19, not a disruption to social cohesion.
Government should stop inconsistent policy and rely on scientific data and convert it into a more down to earth language so Indonesian citizens can read and react to such policy based on their cognitive capability. Government must start to learn emotion sensitive policy and communication not only regarding COVID-19 but also other issues. If the government maintains to engage influencers to deliver their policy, the aim of this effort must be based on knowledge-based information that placing people’s lives and livelihood at the centre, rather than to maintain good publicity of Indonesian government’s image which causes anger among citizens.
Moreover, regarding multilateralism, Indonesia government has shown an active role in building a narrative of solidarity and proposing COVID-19 trust fund through ASEAN. Although the future of this mechanism is blur as ASEAN members show lack of political willingness, emotional narrative to gain material advantage to fund the fight against COVID-19 should be enforced continuously until post pandemic recovery.
On a societal level, government inability to reach out to politics in everyday life should motivate civil society to hand in hand establish resilient citizens because a resilient state and market lies in resilient citizens. Up to this point, what has been done through altruist acts should be highly appreciated. However, challenges such as stigmatization, disobedience to social distancing and avoiding unessential trips continue. Civil society should compassionately continue the effort as they are the one who have collective emotions, language and understanding.
In conclusion, COVID-19 is a global stress-test for everyone. Emotions play a Janus-face role in this situation. It may create distrust and series of mistakes on one hand; and motivate people to overcome the global crisis and anticipate such a challenge in the future on the other hand. As no one knows when the outbreak will end and what kind of long-term impact this pandemic creates, psychological resilience in a constructive way is tremendously needed for both government and society.
[1] “Emotion,” American Psychology Association, https://dictionary.apa.org/emotion (accessed on 28 April 2020).
[2] Jonathan Mercer, “Human nature and the first image: emotion in international politics,” Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol. 9 (2006): 290–294.
[3] See Mercer (2006); Emma Hutchison and Roland Bleiker, “Theorizing Emotions in World Politics,” International Theory 6, №4 (2014): 491–514.
[4] Richard D. French, “Policymaking requires sensitivity to emotion, publicity and performance as much as it does to knowledge and principles,” LSE.ac.uk, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/how-do-we-judge-policies/ (accessed on 28 April 2020).
[5] “We don’t cover things up: Indonesia says amid doubts over its COVID19 handling,” The Jakarta Post, https://jakartaglobe.id/news/we-dont-cover-things-up-indonesia-says-amid-doubts-over-its-covid19-handling
[6] “Kelakar Menteri Airlangga: Izinnya Berbelit-belit, Virus Corona Tak Masuk,” Suara.com, https://www.suara.com/news/2020/02/15/141802/kelakar-menteri-airlangga-izinnya-berbelit-belit-virus-corona-tak-masuk; also “Budi Karya: Virus COVID-19 Tidak Masuk Indonesia Karena Nasi Kucing,” AntaraNews, https://www.antaranews.com/berita/1302390/budi-karya-virus-covid-19-tidak-masuk-indonesia-karena-nasi-kucing (accessed on 28 April 2020).
[7] “We don’t want people to panic: Jokowi says on lack of transparency about COVID cases,” The Jakarta Post, https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/03/13/we-dont-want-people-to-panic-jokowi-says-on-lack-of-transparency-about-covid-cases.html (accessed on 28 April 2020).
[8] Ismail Fahmi, “Analisis Persepsi dan Emosi Publik Terhadap Penanganan #COVID19 oleh Pemerintah” https://pers.droneemprit.id/analisis/ (accessed on 30 April 2020).
[9] Shane Preuss, “Indonesia and COVID-19: What the World is Missing,” The Diplomat, https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/indonesia-and-covid-19-what-the-world-is-missing/ (accessed on 30 April 2020).
[10] Gil H. Park on CSIS Webinar, “COVID-19 Challenges and Experiences in South Korea,” CSIS Indonesia, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn_Sct6oGzA (14 April 2020).
[11] Minh Vu and Bich T. Tran, “The Secret to Vietnam’s COVID-19 Response Success,” The Diplomat, https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/the-secret-to-vietnams-covid-19-response-success/ (accessed on 30 April 2020).
[12] Jon Henley and Eleanor Ainge Roy, “Why do female leaders seem to be more successful at managing the coronavirus crisis?” The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/25/why-do-female-leaders-seem-to-be-more-successful-at-managing-the-coronavirus-crisis (accessed on 1 May 2020).
[13] Stephen Walt, “The Realist’s Guide to the Coronavirus Outbreak.” Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/09/coronavirus-economy-globalization-virus-icu-realism/ (accessed on 1 May 2020).
Hana Naufanita, Research Intern, Department of International Relations, CSIS Indonesia, naufanita@gmail.com
This article was originally published in CSIS Commentaries on 12 Mei 2020
