Thorough maritime foreign policy needed<\/p>\n
Siswo Pramono, Deputy Director for Global Politics,
\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs, Jakarta<\/p>\n
Navy Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan, an American historian and
\nnaval strategist, inferred in 1890, that whoever controlled the
\nsea would likewise control global politics. If his theory
\napplies to Indonesia, the world largest archipelago, then we need
\na comprehensive maritime policy.<\/p>\n
And if geopolitics is meant to be a tool of analysis for the
\nmaking of such policies, then, for Indonesia, location, size,
\ndemography, and natural resources matter. As such, the strategic
\nquestions are these.<\/p>\n
What is the strategic significance of the Indonesian
\narchipelago, which is located in Asian continent, with the
\ndawning powers of China and India, and Australian -- with an
\nincreasingly assertive government portraying itself as an
\nimportant link with the "old" Anglo-American alliance -- for the
\nnational and regional security?<\/p>\n
As Australia is now openly willing to support the U.S.
\nballistic missile defense program, and despite the existing
\nSoutheast Asian nuclear weapon free-zone treaty (although none of
\nthe nuclear weapon states has signed its protocol), do we have
\nthe capacity to control the transit passages of warships through
\nour waters, with some of them, perhaps, having nuclear weapons on
\nboard? Are we prepared for the consequence of incidents, or
\naccidents, in our region, involving foreign warships with nuclear
\nweapons?<\/p>\n
In other words, what is the strategic significance of being
\nlocated at the point connecting the Indian Ocean (with extensions
\nto conflict prone water ways such as the Strait of Hormus, the
\nRed Sea, and the Suez Canal) and the Pacific Ocean (with the
\ntroubled waters of the South China Sea)?<\/p>\n
What is the significance of being a nation of 210 million
\npeople residing in such a strategic location? Are we creative,
\neducated, and determined enough to explore and exploit this
\nadvantage? Or, are we so indifferent or uneducated that all of
\nthe aforementioned factors turn into our strategic disadvantages?<\/p>\n
Do (or when will) we have the capacity to defend our some
\n17,000 islands, or patrol a surface of 5, 193,025 square
\nkilometers?<\/p>\n
The facts are ironic. For instance, out of 6.3 million metric
\ntons of fish -- our annual maximum sustainable yield -- and a
\ntotal annual allowable catch of some 5 million tons, we only
\nmanage to catch about 1 million tons of fish. Some 1.5 million
\ntons of fish are pilfered by our "friends" in the region.<\/p>\n
Amid our struggle for economic recovery, we loose two to four
\nbillion dollars a year as a consequence of poaching.<\/p>\n
We should not ignore the fact that countries in our region
\nhave developed their respective maritime capacities. In Southeast
\nAsia, Thailand and the Philippines are now asserting their status
\nas distant water fishing nations.<\/p>\n
In the South and South West Pacific, the fishing industry has
\nbecome a main component of the economy of Australia, New Zealand,
\nand the small island states.<\/p>\n
In East Asia, China is increasingly able to project its power
\nover the South China Sea. And, in South Asia, India increasingly
\nenhances its naval presence in the Indian Ocean.<\/p>\n
While, in Southeast Asia, interstate wars have been absent for
\nalmost three decades, and thus military invasion in the near
\nfuture is unlikely, historically any invasion of Indonesia has
\ninvolved naval operations.<\/p>\n
With the same token, and also from a military perspective,
\nIndonesia cannot win its war against the secessionists unless it
\nhas the capacity to deploy an effective naval blockade in the
\naffected regions (or islands).<\/p>\n
In either case, while refraining from involvement in the
\npossible regional arms race, an effective navy has an important
\nrole in the defense of our archipelago.<\/p>\n
Do our maritime policies lack vision? In fact, through the
\nDjuanda Declaration of 1956, Indonesia "invented" the concept of
\narchipelagic outlook. This concept followed decades of diplomatic
\nstruggle and was eventually elevated as an important principle of
\nthe international law of the sea.<\/p>\n
But, it is another irony, that our amended Constitution, while
\nasserting in Article 25 that our unitary state is archipelagic in
\nnature, refrains from further elaboration on our maritime
\ngeopolitics. Law No 37\/1999 on Foreign Relations, too, is silent
\non our maritime foreign policy.<\/p>\n
Our future is at sea. We will increasingly deal with various
\ninternational aspects of maritime affairs:<\/p>\n
o Since the open sea has no boundaries, our foreign policy
\nwill increasingly deal with transnational issues on the use of
\noceans, including the protection of the marine environment.<\/p>\n
o Since most of our borders are sea borders, and we share sea
\nborders with, at least, ten neighbors -- India, Thailand,
\nMalaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, the Philippines, Palau, Papua New
\nGuinea, Australia, and East Timor -- our foreign policy will be
\nbeset with the task of preventing or resolving possible border
\ndisputes. Worse, we do not have a law on state borders, nor even
\na comprehensive maritime map.<\/p>\n
o Since most illegal fishing is committed by fishermen from
\nneighboring countries, in particular Thailand, the Philippines,
\nVietnam, and China, our foreign policy should be aimed at finding
\na regional solution.<\/p>\n
o Since our archipelago is vulnerable to military invasion,
\ninfiltration, secessionist movements, and transnational crimes
\n(i.e., terrorism, people smuggling, drug trafficking, piracy,
\nillegal trafficking of weapons, etc), our foreign policy should
\nhelp promote maritime cooperation that sustains regional security
\nand resilience.<\/p>\n
o Since our naval capability is poor, our foreign policy is
\nbeset with the task of finding foreign partners to help
\nstrengthen our navy and coast guards.<\/p>\n
o Most importantly, since our archipelago, exclusive economic
\nzone, and continental shelf are rich in natural resources, our
\nforeign policy should be bent toward transferring the foreign
\ntechnology, know-how, and capital, that are badly needed to
\ndevelop the economic potential of our maritime zone.<\/p>\n
It is time to build a more comprehensive foundation of
\nmaritime geopolitics into our Constitution. Maritime geopolitics,
\nin the existing law dealing with foreign relations, should also
\nbe elaborated further.<\/p>\n
Our maritime policy should be implemented through the
\nconcerted efforts of maritime diplomacy under the coordination of
\nthe Department of Foreign Affairs. And, as a matter of
\ntechnicality, it is thus important for the Department of Foreign
\nAffairs to establish a special operational unit with the sole
\ntask of coordinating the various aspects of maritime foreign
\naffairs.<\/p>\n
The opinions stated above are solely those of the author.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/thorough-maritime-foreign-policy-needed-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }