It often is shortsighted, but it's viewed as protecting that country's interests and those of its own aviation industry. My comments (where I mentioned France, Qatar and the EU, as well as in relation to Indonesia) were specifically in relation to Australia's air services agreements with those partners.
Indonesia is reluctant to increase the capacity available to Australian carriers because its own carriers already can't keep up with QF/JQ/VA. If Indonesia allowed Australia to have, say, 10,000 more seats than we already do, that would likely just widen the gulf and leave Indonesian operators even further behind. Is it good for their hotels, restaurants, attractions, etc.? No. But Australian carriers have found and will continue to find ways to increase capacity to Indonesia within the confines of the current bilateral - e.g. VA starting OOL-DPS and the former CNS/TSV/PHE-DPS services. There are also 2,500 seats available for BNE/MEL/PER/SYD if our carriers are prepared to operate via or beyond to another Australian port, e.g. DRW, HBA, CBR...
Indeed, Indonesia are projectionist, but all it does it drive that traffic through Singapore (Australia-Singapore have open skies and Singapore-Indonesia have open skies). Pre-COVID, Indonesia certainly utilised a lot of their capacity, about 15k so it's not quite as bad as some think. Also, that capacity is available to 5th freedom carriers too. I argue that it's shortsighted since the traffic will fly, it'll just be more inefficient.
Re France, Qantas and the Govt have been trying since the B789s were about to come into service to get additional capacity for Australian carriers to operate to France. Currently, that bilateral works on a 'units of capacity' basis which, when you do the sums, rules out a daily operation for even a 236-seat B789. France has dug its heals in and ultimately refused to budge, ergo QF has chosen not to serve France for now. Again, shortsighted and possibly detrimental to France's other tourism industries, but I guarantee Air France is behind the resistance because they don't have the ability to counter QF and would prefer to retain the relative attractiveness of being able to funnel their pax through SIN, ICN, etc. on codeshares.
It's slightly more complicated than this. Agree that AF have no interest in flying to Australia, and that they will rather funnel passengers through Asia, halfway on their own metal. Qantas couldn't run daily under the current bilateral, but they could run 6x weekly. Given their willingness to run FCO at 3x weekly and other destinations at relatively low frequency, I don't think this would stop them. Generally, the tradition with respect to bilaterals it is seen as being inappropriate for one country to request renegotiation when the current treaty is not being well or near fully utilised. It is this reasoning Indonesia give Australia, for example. But once again, the ample capacity available through countries which have open skies or very liberal arrangements and thus capacity of both ends are the ultimate winners, not Air France. So I doubt that Air France are really lying down on the train tracks on this one.
Qatar is the same, but in reverse. It's no secret that QR wants additional capacity to BNE/MEL/PER/SYD, but Australia won't give it to them. Why? Because QF doesn't want to damage (a) its own services to Europe and (b) its relationship with EK. I don't know for sure, but I imagine VA has previously been against QR having greater access to Australia because of its relationship with EY, but that of course would all have changed when VA and QR formed their own relationship.
Australia and Qatar recently updated the bilateral and increased capacity. It's somewhat in the interests of Australian carriers for this to happen or they will find a more resistance from ACCC when it comes to extensions of JVs. If there was no capacity increase on Qatar, amongst others, it is likely that the QF-EK JV extension may be blocked. It may seems abstract, but ACCC did do a market analysis last time and highlighted that expansion of capacity in competitive connecting markets would be an important indicator going forward.