Defending RI's homeland expensive, but necessary<\/p>\n
Bantarto Bandoro
\nEditor, 'The Indonesian Quarterly',
\nCenter for Strategic and
\nInternational Studies
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
Indonesia straddles one of the world's busiest sea and air
\ncommunication zones, and while it is relatively weak in economic
\nterms, its location makes it a significant geostrategic actor in
\nthe Asia Pacific region. However, this advantage has its
\nvulnerability when matched against its geographic fragmentation.
\nIndonesia is susceptible to foreign attack, has outdated weaponry
\nand, worse, the bulk of this year's military budget of about Rp
\n9.3 trillion goes to the army, leaving the air force and the navy
\nalmost without capital for new sophisticated weaponry.<\/p>\n
This lesson was learned following last week's hearing between
\nthe Navy and Air Force bosses with Commission I of the House of
\nRepresentatives.<\/p>\n
In an unprecedented blunt manner, the two chiefs of staff
\npainted a bleak picture of the current reality in Indonesia's
\ndefense posture and capability. Simply said, the national
\nterritory is highly vulnerable to air and naval attack from
\nforeign countries due to the outdated weaponry systems possessed
\nby the country's Navy and Air Force.<\/p>\n
Perhaps, it was a kind of embarrassment for the Indonesian
\npolitical and military leaders and the public at large that the
\ncomplaint came from two chiefs of staff who serve to defend the
\nair and sea jurisdictions, an area considered highly vulnerable
\nto external threat.<\/p>\n
But disclosures of weakness in Navy and Air Force capability
\nsent a clear signal that the nation has to act quickly in
\nredesigning the country's defense posture.<\/p>\n
Not only that, the confession by the chiefs should mean that
\nthe Air Force and Navy be given an appropriate role in defending
\nthe country. Consequently, the Air Force and the Navy should
\nreceive more budget than they used to in the past. It is time to
\nreassess the allocation of the budget and the present mapping of
\nthe tasks of defending the homeland.<\/p>\n
Because the army receive more of the budget so far, there is
\na perception that the nation's defense would focus on land only,
\nthus leaving the army the main task of defending the nation.<\/p>\n
Were such a perception true, it clearly ignores the fact that
\nIndonesia consists of thousands of islands surrounded by a
\nlengthy coastline, meaning that the country's defense planners
\nmust critically consider the geographical factor in their defense
\npolicy. The air and maritime dimension in our defense policy
\nseems to be missing.<\/p>\n
What was interesting from the above hearing was the blunt
\nassessment by the two chiefs of staff that Indonesia might face
\nexternal threats. To be precise, it might be in the form of air
\nand naval attacks from foreign countries. Were this assessment
\nvalid, it would be a departure from the present policy of
\ndeveloping the armed forces chiefly to deal with suppressing
\ninternal insurgents rather than with external threats.<\/p>\n
Having examined the external strategic environment of the
\ncountry, it is not irrational to adopt such assessment. Current
\ndevelopment in the region indicates an increase in piracy,
\nhijacking, illicit trafficking in arms, smuggling of people, and
\nworse perhaps, a hidden intention from external countries to
\ncreate turbulence in our country.<\/p>\n
Being a country with a vast geographic area and thus
\nvulnerable to foreign attack, it is perhaps important for the
\nIndonesian Military (TNI) to identify areas that must be
\ncritically defended and protected in case of external attacks,
\nnamely: (1) military deployment which includes radar sites, naval
\nbases and air bases and other supporting military sites; (2)
\ncritical national infrastructures; (3) the population; (4)
\nsovereignty - border and coastal areas; (5) constitutional
\nauthority, meaning a continuity of government; (6) economic
\nresources.<\/p>\n
Defending the homeland is indeed a very expensive business as
\nit involves all national components, primarily the military,
\neither at the planning, budgeting or operational level. The
\nconfession by the two chiefs of staff before Commission I is a
\nshift in the military paradigm which suggests that the navy and
\nthe air force may play a bigger and important role in national
\nsecurity; and that the air and naval forces cannot perform well
\nin defending the nation from whatever form of external threats
\nunless the budget is allocated sufficiently to their services.<\/p>\n
Indonesia is indeed in dire need to beef up its military
\ncapability. Such capability should be built on the bases of our
\nlong-term national interests and projected to protect among other
\nthings the democratic process and economic development, and to
\nuphold internal stability and deter any possible external
\nintruders. But the present condition of our economy does not seem
\nto guarantee the fulfillment of such promise.<\/p>\n
What is perhaps embarrassing is that being the largest and
\nmost influential country in the region, Indonesia now has zero-
\npower projection and this would make the sprawling archipelago
\neven more difficult to defend in case of a conventional attack.<\/p>\n
It has always been a dream that Indonesia possess the
\ncapability to project amphibious assault battalions into trouble
\nareas in eastern and western part of the republic. But the aging
\nequipment and obsolete weaponry systems does not permit Indonesia
\nto take that course.<\/p>\n
Through the above hearing, the navy and air force have gone
\npublic with the information on the weaknesses of our defense
\ncapability. Such disclosure should serve as a kind of warning to
\nthe country's top military leaders that if Indonesia wants to
\nhave a military it is better to build one that is credible,
\nreliable and capable.<\/p>\n
Thus complaints by the chiefs of staff must not be viewed in
\nnegative terms, but perhaps as a starting point to rethink our
\ndefense policy. And it is within such thinking that the navy and
\nair force should be given a special place in the defense planning
\nprocess as well as a more strategic role in defending the
\nhomeland. After all, defending the nation is expensive, but
\nnecessary, and is the responsibility of all.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/defending-ris-homeland-expensive-but-necessary-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}