Towards Indian Ocean cooperation<\/p>\n
By Hasyim Djalal<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Australia is reportedly planning to organize an
\ninformal conference in Perth in the middle of this year to study
\nthe possibility of developing a Pacific Economic Cooperation
\nConference (PECC) type of cooperation for the Indian Ocean.<\/p>\n
Some 27 littoral and hinterland countries around the Indian
\nOcean are expected to attend. Since the conference will be
\ninformal, the participants will presumably attend in a private
\ncapacity, although, like the PECC, the participants may consist
\nof government officials, academics and business communities.<\/p>\n
It is assumed that the conference will be exploratory in
\nnature, and therefore it may not have a clear cut agenda. It will
\nbe a brainstorming meeting in order to assess the mood for
\ncooperation, and if the mood is good, the conference may identify
\nareas and the modalities for such cooperation. Like PECC, it is
\nassumed that it will strongly emphasize economic rather than
\npolitical or security cooperation.<\/p>\n
Development of economic cooperation in the Pacific has reached
\na higher level than in the Indian Ocean. After many years of
\n\"second track\" informal approaches, the PECC has now achieved a
\nformal level through the establishment of APEC. In the security
\narea, it has also achieved a formal forum through the
\nestablishment of ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), in addition to the
\ncontinuing activities of the \"second track\" informal approach of
\nthe Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP).<\/p>\n
At the same time, the Western Pacific area has also shown
\ntremendous economic activity and growth. ASEAN, as a sub-regional
\norganization, plays a very significant role in making the PECC,
\nAPEC, CSCAP, and ARF a working mechanism for cooperation in the
\nPacific. This due, to a large extent, to the viability and
\ncohesiveness of the association.<\/p>\n
It is therefore understandable that many countries around the
\nIndian Ocean would like to emulate the development in the Pacific
\nregion and study how a similar relationship can be transplanted
\nto the Indian Ocean.<\/p>\n
True, the two areas are not the same. The Pacific Ocean is
\nsurrounded by highly advanced industrialized countries such as
\nthe United States, Japan, and Canada; newly industrialized
\ncountries or entities such as South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and
\nSingapore; and emerging countries like China and Indonesia.<\/p>\n
Although the level of development in these countries vary, the
\nchallenge and the success of the cooperative efforts in the
\nPacific have been the ability to recognize the diversity and
\ndevelop complimentarily and cooperation through the diversity for
\nmutual benefits, rather than confrontation for the benefit of no
\none.<\/p>\n
Despite their differences, the Pacific countries have been
\nable to emphasize the common good, rather than specific and
\nnarrow individual nationalistic approaches. To a large extent,
\nthis is due to the success of ASEAN and the \"ASEAN spirit\" and
\nsolidarity.<\/p>\n
The Indian Ocean is different from the Pacific region in many
\nrespects. With the exception of Australia, practically all the
\nlittoral and hinterland countries of the Indian Ocean are
\ndeveloping countries and some of them are still beset with
\ninternal, bilateral or regional problems. The ability to advance
\na common good as in ASEAN, is still less pronounced in the sub-
\nregional organizations in the Indian Ocean. The promotion of
\ncooperative relations in the Indian Ocean would require strong
\nexternal support and donors. In some cases, nationalism and
\nethnocentrism still command major components of the national
\npolitical culture. Emphasis on economic considerations is just
\nbeginning to emerge in the political culture and its full impact
\nmay not be felt for some time.<\/p>\n
Despite the discrepancies between the Pacific and the Indian
\nOceans, efforts to promote regional cooperation in the Indian
\nOcean should not be brushed aside. In fact, these efforts should
\nbe nurtured and any proposal should be looked upon positively
\nand, as far as possible, supported.<\/p>\n
There has been much effort to develop a notion of togetherness
\naround the Indian Ocean. There was a proposal to establish the
\nIndian Ocean as a Zone of Peace, free from nuclear weapons. This
\nproposal didn't go anywhere because some countries didn't want to
\nforego nuclear weapons in the Indian Ocean Basin. There was also
\na proposal to convene an Indian Ocean conference.<\/p>\n
Again, this didn't go anywhere, partly because of difficulty
\nin defining which countries are to be regarded as littoral or
\nhinterland in the Indian Ocean and who should be invited to
\nattend. The motivation behind the initiative was mostly
\npolitical, and therefore met with some political difficulties.
\nThere was also the influence of the Cold War that made it
\ndifficult to convene such a conference or to establish such a
\nZone of Peace.<\/p>\n
Now that the Cold War has ended, and states are concentrating
\non economic development, it should be relatively easier to forge
\nsuch a regional cooperation in the Indian Ocean.<\/p>\n
In fact, there has been a non-political formal cooperative
\norganization in the Indian Ocean, namely the Indian Ocean Marine
\nAffairs Cooperation (IOMAC), which concentrates its efforts on
\npromoting cooperation in marine scientific research, marine
\nresources utilization, environmental protection and other Law of
\nthe Sea related areas.<\/p>\n
After the adoption of the Law of the Sea Convention in 1982,
\nseveral Indian Ocean countries began to look for areas of
\ncooperation in implementing or benefiting from the provisions of
\nthe Law of the Sea Convention. After several years of
\ninformality, the cooperation was formalized into an inter-
\ngovernmental organization through an IOMAC charter adopted in
\nArusha, Tanzania in 1991, and signed by Indonesia, Iran, Kenya,
\nPakistan, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nepal and Tanzania.<\/p>\n
India, Australia, Malaysia and others attended the meeting but
\ndidn't signed the charter. The charter will go into force when it
\nis ratified by eight countries. So far, six countries have
\nratified it, (Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Pakistan, Mozambique, Kenya,
\nMauritius) while other signatories are expected to ratify it
\nsoon.<\/p>\n
Australia, France, Germany, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Nepal
\nand others regularly or from time to time attended the IOMAC
\nmeeting as observers. In the past, IOMAC activities and its
\nsecretariat in Colombo have been supported by the UNDP.
\nCurrently, some non-Indian Ocean countries are supporting the
\nIOMAC activities and programs, particularly the United States and
\nGermany.<\/p>\n
If the Perth Conference is intended as a \"second track\" non-
\ngovernmental approach to develop economic cooperation in the
\nIndian Ocean region, it should be supportable and should
\ncomplement the IOMAC.<\/p>\n
Countries that are not members of the IOMAC should be
\nencouraged to become members, particularly those that have signed
\nits charter and those that have been attending IOMAC meetings as
\nobservers, including Australia and India.<\/p>\n
The Perth conference must not compete with the IOMAC or look
\nto create another \"first track\" governmental organization in the
\nIndian Ocean that would ignore or undermine IOMAC activities.<\/p>\n
Dr. Hasyim Djalal is the Indonesian Ambassador at Large for
\nthe Law of the Sea. .<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/towards-indian-ocean-cooperation-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}