Indonesia
and the shifting power in Asia Pacific
Nur
Alia Pariwita ; A lecturer of geopolitics and security strategy
at the University of Indonesia (UI) and was an Indonesian non-governmental
delegate at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 30-June 1
|
JAKARTA
POST, 16 Juni 2014
People’s
Liberation Army deputy chief Lt. Gen. Wang Guanzhong’s impromptu speech made
headlines at the 13th Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore recently.
In his
remarks on the last day of the three-day meeting, Wang lashed out at the
speeches made by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and US Secretary of
Defense Chuck Hagel. Wang stated the two leaders cooperated with each other
and took advantage of talking first to shoot out provocative messages against
China.
In his
keynote speech at the opening dinner, Abe emphasized Japan’s proactive
contribution to maintaining stability and peace in Asia. He reiterated
Japan’s respect for the rule of law, democracy and human rights many times in
his speech.
Abe
tried to persuade the international community that the changing regional
security architecture in Asia had pushed Japan to reconstruct the legal basis
to the right of collective self-defense and to international cooperation,
including the use of force in Japan’s international peace mission to protect
civilians.
“Diplomatic
speech” by Abe powerfully hinted that Japan ought to reinterpret its
constitution in an attempt to safeguard national interests in the East China
Sea and to foster security and order in the region.
The rise
of nationalism and remilitarization has become an intense debate in Japan
these days, whether Japan should play a great and more active role in
rebalancing power in Asia or stay on the “conventional pacifism” track with
the mandate to create peace by a peaceful means.
The next
day, a more frank and direct speech was given by Hagel. He said that China
had taken unilateral actions regarding its claims in the South China Sea and
declaration of an Air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea.
Those
actions, he said, have undermined stability in Asia. Even though the US takes
no position on competing territorial claims, it certainly opposes any use of
intimidation, coercion and force in asserting claims.
As in
the past, the 2014 Shangri-La Dialogue, hosted by London-based think tank the
International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), was intriguing. It is
(usually) a “diplomatic” meeting, but China’s reaction to Japan and the US
this year was noteworthy behavior.
Some say
it looked like a drama, while others labeled it as a portrayal of the
escalation of distrust among countries in Asia Pacific. However, at the same
time, each country still shows eagerness to raise their objections and points
of view. This depicts the essence of dialogue itself as an attempt to open a
debate forum and find a peaceful solution.
But what
can Indonesia learn from the Shangri-La Dialogue this year anyway? One thing
for sure is the next Indonesian president has a more challenging job in
response to shifting power in Asia Pacific. The way in which the upcoming
government formulizes its foreign and security policy will come under the
regional and international spotlights.
Then
there are several points that should become the main concerns of the seventh
president of Indonesia in shaping his foreign and security policy.
First is
continuation of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s policy. During his two
terms as president, Indonesia has had quite impressive track records in
foreign and security policies supported by a relatively stable domestic
politics and economic condition.
Yudhoyono
is a proponent of Indonesia’s active participation in regional and
international forums. He has apparently carried on the efforts of Megawati
Soekarnoputri to strengthen Indonesia’s role in ASEAN after holding the
rotating chairmanship of the grouping in 2003. Yudhoyono’s government has
deeply engaged in various ASEAN meetings, like the ASEAN Defense Ministers
Meeting, ASEAN Regional Forum, East Asia Summit and helped set up the ASEAN
Human Rights Declaration in 2012.
Indonesia
has also participated in international operations. For instance, it has been
involved in the UN peacekeeping mission and in delivering humanitarian
assistance as well as formulating the post-2015 development agenda together
with the UK and Liberia as co-chairs of the High-level Panel under the UN
Secretary General’s mandate.
Second,
Indonesia doesn’t have to choose to be an ally of any single major power in
the region. I think we can still implement our “independent and active”
foreign policy doctrine with some adjustments through the dynamic equilibrium
principle.
In the
short and mid periods, we’re not only facing the US-China power shift, but
also the rise of Japan and India, who will both play a more assertive role in
the region. Rather than take a side, Indonesia as the natural leader of ASEAN
should embrace all countries in managing order in Asia Pacific. Therefore,
ASEAN is the fundamental platform for Indonesia to reach its strategic
interests at the regional and international level.
Third,
Indonesia needs a white paper to project Indonesia’s goals in economic,
security, defense and foreign affairs. In the next 15 years, Indonesia might
focus on how to achieve its target as a middle power that can serve as a
“stabilizer” in Asia Pacific.
However,
in the long run, let’s say 30-35 years later, Indonesia has to have a vision
to become a major power. We have the economic, social and cultural capital
based on our geographical landscape as well as human and natural resources.
To
become a major power, Indonesia also needs to gradually enhance its military
capability. As Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro said in the recent
Shangri-La Dialogue, Indonesia is on its way to modernizing its military
capability to achieve the minimum essential force by the 2020s. The
increasing military budget should be balanced by transparency and military
professionalism.
No one
doubts Indonesia’s strategic position in the Asia-Pacific. All we need is a
leader who has the capacity to maintain economic and domestic political
stability in a democratic way, and at the same time the ability to play a
more pivotal role in the region. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar