The Missing Link between Dynamic Equilibrium Doctrine and

Indonesia’s Interest in South Pacific

Miftahul Choir

, Joe William

, Raihan Zahirah

Miftahul Choir Parahyangan Catholic University, Jl. Bogor Baru blok C1 No. 3, Bogor

Joe William, Parahyangan Catholic University, Graha Sunter Pratama blok G No. 12, Jakarta

Raihan Zahirah, Parahyangan Catholic University, Jl. Gunung Rahayu II No. 20,Bandung

Keyword: dynamic equilibrium, middle power, national interest, regionalism

Abstract : Asia Pacific, a region which deposit a potential resources, countries and bunch of quarrel with the

intertwined and overlapped national interests serve the arena for great power to contend. Indonesia, as a

middle power country in the region, introduced her presence by foreign policy doctrine named ‘dynamic

equilibrium’, an approach coined by former Indonesia Minister for Foreign Affairs, Marty Natalegawa

during his tenure in 2009-2014. The purpose of the approach is to strengthened Indonesia presence in the

region and juxtapose with the region power. Through dynamic equilibrium, Indonesia participate actively in

the region politic and bringing Indonesia diplomatic norm to conflict-filled regions as well as increase

Indonesia stature in international politics. At the same time, in the south part of the Pacific, Indonesia also

had interest to defend the territorial integrity from South Pacific countries that support West Papua

independence struggle. However, in spite of the national interest and stronger position in Asia Pacific,

Indonesia yet to maximize its advantage to secure West Papua from South Pacific countries. Therefore, the

paper would answer the question in regard to how Indonesia use Dynamic Equilibrium as foreign policy

instrument on securing West Papua integrity toward South Pacific influence. This paper will use the middle-

power-ship theory to find the missing link between dynamic equilibrium and Indonesia interest in South

Pacific by viewing Indonesia role as leader in the region. This paper will use literature review on dynamic

equilibrium concept and Indonesia leadership in East Asia and South Pacific on 2009-2017.

1 INTRODUCTION

The rapid modernization in current era is affecting

the international geopolitical situation as a whole,

bringing the more dynamic and contemporary

political shape within this world. Particularly its

relevance with the vitality in Asia-Pacific region,

however, is full of tension and uncertainty especially

from between existing major powers. Regarding

this, Indonesia attempts to overcome this problem by

enhancing and reaffirming its foreign policy basis

idea which is ‘free & active’ by establishing the

Dynamic Equilibrium concept as its foreign policy

doctrine.

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) at his 2009

inauguration as a president made a statement which

reads ‘Indonesia can exercise its foreign policy

freely in all directions, having a million friends and

zero enemies’. The statement ‘a million friends and

zero enemies’ clearly describe Indonesia’s foreign

policy ideas for the next term of his presidency.

Therefore, Marty Natalegawa, the foreign minister

during that time, has popularized the so-called

doctrine of dynamic equilibrium to emphasize this

statement. It is the manifestation of Indonesia’s

national vision which includes playing an active role

and contribution in ASEAN integration, as well as

Asia-Pacific and Asia-Africa strategic partnership. It

was not until Indonesia served as ASEAN chairman

in 2011, that Marty Natalegawa coined the Dynamic

Equilibrium doctrine to clarify its foreign policy.

Indonesia foreign policy that put Asia-Pacific as

the forefront of foreign policy concentric and

dynamic equilibrium that also focused in the region

where Indonesia located should has the implication

that can be benefit to Indonesia interest in South

Pacific, which is to deter their support toward West

Papua. However, seeing Indonesia focused on

economic development and South Pacific provide no

benefit, Indonesia seen lack of engagement in South

Pacific. Due to lack of engagement to South Pacific,

the region perception toward Indonesia remain

130

Choir, M., William, J. and Zahirah, R.

The Missing Link between Dynamic Equilibrium Doctrine and Indonesia’s Interest in South Paciﬁc.

DOI: 10.5220/0010274200002309

In Proceedings of Airlangga Conference on International Relations (ACIR 2018) - Politics, Economy, and Security in Changing Indo-Paciﬁc Region, pages 130-138

ISBN: 978-989-758-493-0

hostile thus giving Indonesia obstacle to secure West

Papua.

This paper will analyze dynamic equilibrium

conception as a possible tool for Indonesia to

keeping South Pacific in line with Indonesia interest.

The paper will test dynamic equilibrium

compatibility to the middle power conception,

seeing through middle power diplomacy it gives

more possibility to engage with regional partner as it

try to accommodate region needs and targeting at

confidence building. To connect the effectivity of

middle power diplomacy, this paper will use Ralf

Emmers’ Regional Security Strategies theory which

define one country capability on influencing

regional order through the means of middle power

diplomacy. To do so, the paper would also briefly

explain current regional order and regional issues in

South Pacific, to shows and determine whether

Indonesia has the resources to involve in South

Pacific politics.

2 DETERMINING THE MIDDLE

POWER CONCEPT ON

DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM

The purpose of dynamic euilibrium doctrine is to

involve all the major relevant powers within a more

cooperative framework as a basis for the

development of an inclusive regional architecture. It

also involves the countries within the Asia-Pacific

region not limited by size or capability, to become a

platform for all actors involved in resettling the issue

throughout the region, especially security issue by

featuring the multilateral agreement to further

emphasize the need of organizational mechanism

and obedience by rules. By mediating and making

strategic cooperation without discrimination in the

international Asia-Pacific community, Indonesia

wanted to show its commitment and integrity as a

reliable source within regional geopolitics and

community. Needless to say, this inclusive action

which relies heavily on participation from major

relevance power is expected to make Indonesia as a

trustworthy neutral partner. That will result in

changing the major power’s regional perspective

towards Indonesia. Not as a threatening actor, but as

a neutral strategic partner that has the power to

reconciles tensions within the region

In order to make a mutually beneficial

relationship, the doctrine can be implemented on the

creation of a trusting and peaceful system among

nations involved. The centerpieces of that system are

the expanded ASEAN institutions, including the

East Asia Summit (EAS), ASEAN Defense

Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM+), and the

Expanded ASEAN Maritime Forum (AMF). The

reason why ASEAN is chosen to further enhance

Indonesia policy simply because Indonesia believes

that ASEAN possess the capability and strategic

position to accommodate various interests between

major actors involved, in regard with several

consideration. Firstly, Asia-Pacific region consists of

many international organizations, but lacks the

contributions of all parties involved such as

Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which

does not involve the United States, Japan, and South

Korea. There is also the Asia-Europe Meeting

(ASEM), which does not involve United States. The

geopolitics situation in Asia-Pacific is currently in a

state of ‘Mexican Standoff’, held in a deadlock

position with no development towards peace and

security building. The roots of problem from this

issue is that too many architects but not enough

builders, all these regional organizations and

gatherings provide plenty of forums for debate and

discussion, but none offers any foundation for

building regional peace and security. Secondly,

ASEAN have a full potential of being a neutral

platform for all powers, moreover with current

development in international affairs of US policy

‘pivot to Asia’ and China ‘one belt initiative’,

there’s a possibility this interests could clash

especially in South China Sea. By bringing the

ASEAN centrality, peace and security could be

achieved in the region. This were already

implemented by creating and commencing the Code

of Conduct (COC) between ASEAN and China

regarding maritime issue in South China Sea and

joint maritime exercise that will be scheduled at

August 2018. Without ASEAN involvement,

Indonesia also actively reaffirm its principle by

emphasizing democracy and other idea as a basic

principle of peace making building effort, in which

correlated with its foreign policy such as Bali

Democracy Forum and Extraordinary Summit of

Palestine and Al-Quds Al-Sharif

The definition of middle power itself as a legal

entity is heavily relied on the international affairs

and order at the specific era. For example, in

eighteen century Europe the concept of “middle

power” was applied to Germany at that time, due to

its geographically middle location and the relatively

middle strength of its national power. In this period,

middle power countries were assumed to act

strategically because of the insecurity of being in the

“middle” position in international society. So at that

The Missing Link between Dynamic Equilibrium Doctrine and Indonesia’s Interest in South Paciﬁc

131

time, the middle power country is perceived as

country that were thought to be declining powerful

countries or growing small countries, and easier to

be invaded than powerful countries and more

beneficial than small countries for invading

countries.After the World War 2, with the changing

international order and the rise of Cold War between

US and Soviet Union, it goes parallel with the

development of modern IR theory and concept such

as theory like Neo-Realist, Neo-Liberal, Neo-

Functionalism, etc., is only a few example of many

concept and theory that was created in this era by IR

academics enthusiast in correlation with the demand

from public on how to explained the international

affairs that were in motion.

During this era, the focus in defining middle

powers was slowly shifted to a country’s roles in

international organizations, such as its ability and

willingness to mediate in conflicts, as well as

military power, size of territory, or population. In

relevance with middle power that rose with certainty

in post war era, Andrew F.Cooper, Richard Higgott,

and Richard Nossal conducted case studies of

Canada and Australia in a book titled Relocating

Middle Power. In this view, the term middle power

“shifted from being an expression of a specific role

in the international community to a descriptor for

specific, middle-state ‟behavior”. This specific

middle state behavior is composed into a few

perspectives such as functional, behavioral,

hierarchical, and normative model. This concept was

constructed both by researchers and policy

practitioners to further indicating the possibility of

some countries being a Middle Power by analyzing

their action.

Functional principle is the basic ideas of this

middle power concept, before further be developed

by other researched based on their methodological

research. This principle sees that one country must

be able to influence certain areas and functions in

international affairs, by then they can be considered

as a middle power. Take example of Canada role in

1956 Suez Crisis (Egypt vs. Israel and Allies),

Canada successfully implemented the prime

example of achieving peace by creating a mandate

for United Nations Peacekeeping Forces.

Afterwards, Lester B. Pearson as Canada PM at that

time received Nobel Peace Prize and now considered

as the father of modern concept of peacekeeping.

Canada is considered by this principle as a middle

power that successfully influences Suez Crisis in

mediatory positions. The problem is, most

researchers were hardly had theoretical examinations

on Canadian foreign policies; thus, analysis in this

perspective cannot generalize to other countries or

other issues. As Michel K. Hawes indicated, of most

publications issued by policy practitioners at the

time, “no matter how cleverly constructed, most of

those works are essentially political memoirs. In

correlation with Indonesia foreign policy, it clearly

gives a better understanding by using Dynamic

Equilibrium doctrine as its core, unlike nations who

are uncertain of their foreign policies, such as

Canada. So basically, what Indonesia has done

wasn’t just only political action in uncertain policies,

but consistently is in accordance with its doctrine.

For example, Indonesia successfully persuaded both

countries (Thailand and Cambodia) to allow

Indonesian observer to monitor the ceasefire in the

disputed area at 2011. While as a whole it doesn’t

achieve its primary goals, with primary reason is

because Thailand military government lack of

cooperation, it still contributed much to the making

of peace resolution in the region and later the

agreement for both countries to take the dispute

issue through International Court of Justice (ICJ)

domain.

Behavioural as a second principle, asserting that

middle power concept depends heavily on leadership

capability from each nation, thus establishing a

particular concept which middle power countries has

their own way of leadership, well-known as

middlepowermanship. By middlepowermanship,

each country has different characteristic and

theoritical orientation related with their certain roles

in middle power country. The core of its roles in

behavioural theory consist of their tendency to

pursue multilateral solutions to international

problems, their tendency to embrace compromise

positions in international disputes, their tendency to

embrace notions of good international

citizenship.Indonesia active participation in

brokering Philippines Mindanao Peace Process

throughout the decades as well as offering assistance

to monitoring election in Myanmar and Thailand,

consolidating support for Myanmar’s chairmanship

bid in ASEAN for 2014, with expectations that

would motivate the Myanmarese government to

further democratize and adopt more stringent human

rights values, is a real manifestation of Indonesia

multilateral pursue and good citizenship building in

correlation with the core of behavioural principle.

Normative principle considers that being in the

middle based on the national power and political

culture of some middle powers result in

humanitarian international activities including

foreign aid. Indonesia active roles in helping

Myanmar after the Nargis Cyclone by humanitarian

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

132

assistance, giving shelter, staff and staple to

Rohingya refugee as well as involvement in

developing and helping developing country such as

Sri Lanka and Palestine clearly shown Indonesia

active roles not limited in ASEAN region only,

however, is much wider than that.

Hierarchical model approach ranks and

categorizes states by applying standards relating to

their capabilities. Countries with medium-range

capabilities are grouped as middle powers, and great

powers and weak powers can be categorized in the

same manner. This capabilities is calculated

according to their national power such as

willingness, human resources, national stability,

economy power, etc.

Indonesia is lacking in most of the principle of

middle power country capabilities accordingly. By

normative model, Indonesia is hampered by

insufficient fund, human resources, international

position, etc. Likewise with hierarchical model,

which Indonesia based on many indicator is not

suitable to be grouped with country with moderate

national power like Australia or Canada. However,

the current statement and foreign policy principle

that Indonesia empshazing to its organization and

counterparts its clearly shown here that Indonesia

wants to prove its credibility and pledge to its tenet

by acting like a middle power should, while at the

same time improving and developing capability of

its national power to become tantamount with others

middle power counterparts.

3 INDONESIA INTENTION ON

DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM

International perception and reputation building is a

key for Indonesia to further pursue their national and

international goals. For this case, Canada and China

which are using their foreign policy dynamics for

reputation building and further changing their

country perception. Canada in this case after world

war II, emerged from a rural agricultural country to

became heavily industrialized country, as well as its

political shape which range itself on western blocs.

But after its participation in founding permanent

peacekeeping forces in Suez Crisis (1956), its

political perception is changing dramatically

especially in Pierre Trudeau government. From one

of the main western bloc power, to became a well-

respected meditational actor in international

relationship, from both western bloc and eastern

bloc accordingly. This benefit Canada in terms of its

action in international politics which oftenly greeted

positivily. China is approaching Africa and other

developing countries with its economical assistance

and developing plan, to further expand its influence

and promote Chinese product throughout its scope.

While not situating itself in middle power actor, its

reputation and perception gradually become more

favorable in most developing countries such as

Pakistan, Nigeria, Zambia. While in most western

countries its perception dominantly is unfavorable.

This helps secure China interest from both national

and international shape. National shape including the

current ruling government, Xi Jinping, gradually

become more favourable because of his successful

foreign policy, thus obscure his problem concerning

Hongkong Democracy, Tibet, etc. International

shape include international views on Taiwan in

regards with One China policy, in which gradually

more countries cut ties with Taiwan in hope to

establish business connection with China.

Therefore, by positioning herself as middle

power, Indonesia is hoping to receive a favorable

outcome in regards with its national and

international principal aim. Especially with the

current issue regarding Papua integrity and

separatism, while Indonesia activily building its

perception and also its assertiveness towards

separatism issue in general, it doesn’t heavily

involved in managing its foreign policy principle in

South Pacific as one of the main obstacle in securing

Papua integrity as a whole Indonesia sovereignty.

This brings us to the question of why Indonesia has

not yet maximizing its middle power diplomacy

principle in South Pacific.

4 REGIONALISM IN SOUTH

PACIFIC

South Pacific is widely recognized as the sub-region

of vast Asia-Pacific which constitute three groups

based on ethnic which are Melanesia in the west,

Polynesia in the east and Micronesia in the north.

Each sub-region constituted different pattern of

regionalism. South Pacific had Pacific Island Forum

(PIF) as regional bloc. Despite not including

Australia and New Zealand in regional bloc, until

Fiji coup in 2006 and growing threats of non-

traditional security the two countries exercising their

influence in the region. The regional bloc later

losing it’s effectivity on managing regional

challenge and thus emerge the new sub-regional

organization. However, it is only Melanesia that

The Missing Link between Dynamic Equilibrium Doctrine and Indonesia’s Interest in South Paciﬁc

133

succeed on gaining further advance of regionalism

than other sub-region, while Polynesia and

Micronesia remain independently or bandwagoning

bigger states for survive.

Ramesh Thakur argued that the regionalism in

South Pacific based on pragmatic political

cooperation to the neglect of ideological

politicization and conflict.Similiar to Southeast Asia,

South Pacific hold the regionalism that put

emphasizes on regional identity and charactersitc.

The Pacific Way known as everyone sacrifices

something for the overall benefits of the whole and

all decision made by consensus. Which share the

similiarity to Southeast Asia. Different to other

regionalism, South Pacific states has share amount

of power distribution thus avoiding the unilateral

hegemonic to emerge in the region, but the condition

giving the opportunity for extraregional entity to

create more influental decision on regional issue.

Thakur also argued that this condition made South

Pacific has one common goal other than

diminishing regional problem which is to gaining

international recognition and position ahead of

Australia and New Zealand. Historical background

that has just gaining independent in 1970s also made

South Pacific keen on establishing independent

regional structure, which also can be found at the

establishiment of Association of Southeast Asia

Nations (ASEAN). The similiarity also causing

South Pacific regionalism avoiding to discuss

internal matters of each countries. However, it is still

the amount of capability and ongoing state and

nation building that made the South Pacific states

failed to follow the neighbor region.

South Pacific poses no threat coming from

external power, most of regional threat coming

internally such as resources destruction,

enviromental degradation, economic failure,

political decay and disintegration. Due to

colonialism that created artificial states that led to

weak international statehood had cause the region

states having small capability to become well-

established states. The region also lack of security

architecture internationally and domestically. Due to

such condition, South Pacific rely on extraregional

partner on solving their regional problem, despite

their reluctancy to take the donors for granted and

keep maintaing independency on regional politics.

For instance, on dealing with enviromental issues,

South Pacific states pursue collaborative strategic to

manage the threats. The states survival also depend

on international action on climate change. Different

other sub-region in South Pacific, Melanesia

geographical location give the region more resources

and thus attracting external power to join the

regional politic. Aside from enviromental issue,

South Pacific states also has the sensitivity toward

the nuclear-owned states due to during the cold war

era the region used as nuclear testing grown by great

power.

The instability that occured in South Pacific

region pose dangerous threat to it’s neighbouring

countries, especially to Australia and New Zealand.

Thus, the instability that influencing the

conceptualisation of South Pacific regionalism.

Weak states that rely on external aid are vulnerable

to foreign influence. Western power with Australia

and New Zealand as its presence in the Pacific has

became the traditional partner of South Pacific

country for the ongoing nation and state building.

However, the growing instability in the region also

made western power abandoned their presence in

South Pacific, which turn out making way for other

external power to interference in the region. South

Pacific known as becoming the arc of instability for

Australia. Any threat to regional stability have the

potential to threatens Australian security.Therefore,

in the Australia Defece White Paper Australia still

maintaining on prioritizing South Pacific as foreign

policy frontline. The growing reach of influence,

especially by fellow Asian nations could endanger

Australia presence in the region. However,

Australia’s position on South Pacific also depend on

the whole Asia-Pacific security issue. Since the Bali

Bombing 2002, Australia foreign policy security

strategy shifted to more prioritizing wider range of

Asia-Pacific especially to the states that is prone to

terrorist attack. In 2006 Australia continue on

pulling its position in the region by taking more

intervensionist approach toward Fiji Coup which

made Fiji turned their reliance from Australia to

Indonesia and China. In 2013, Australia ended its

long term committment toward South Pacific states.

With no United States presence in the

region, declining Australia and New Zealand

influene in the region and the increasing internal

threat that could emerge into regional threat, South

Pacific welcoming new partner in the region. China

succesfully fill in the position left by Australia and

New Zealand to set their influence in the region by

giving South Pacific states help they needed to

survive. In the United Nations, China sponsoring the

establishment of Asia and the Pacific Small Island

Developing States group to gather voice on

championing enviromental issue at multilateral

level. China also helping Fiji, Papua New Guinea on

building infrastructure and bring investment to the

industry in South Pacific states. In the region, China

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

134

took soft balancing approach with indirect

diplomacy and economic domination. The strategy is

effective due to the fact that finance and funding is

all what South Pacific states need the most, not the

traditional military means. The long term goal of

China in the region itself is to replace United States

prominent position in the whole Pacific. Other than

using non-military forces, China also taking

advantage of what Australia had failed to do so in

the region, separation between political and

economic aid. Western power forcing democracy to

the ongoing state building in Pacific, but the outside

democracy is incompatible in South Pacific States

which would only ended up worsening state building

process. Benjamin Reily stated that the rapid

democratization prone to multi-ethnic states and

make the possibility of secessionist group become

higher. The artificial establishment of South Pacific

states and growing secessionist group in several

states such as Papua New Guinea, Fiji and New

Caledonia become the prove that the western

democracy is not fit with the characteristic of South

Pacific. China also succeed on avoiding Western

influence by not undermining the root causes of the

conflict such as uneven development and

illegitimate government.

5 GEOPOLITICS,

OPPORTUNITY, AND

CHALLENGE INDONESIA

FACING BY PLAYING MIDDLE

POWER ROLE IN SOUTH

PACIFIC

With the previous section, it’s clearly state that

South Pacific region is changing rapidly, with more

instability and new challenge brought by externally

dominance power that tends to convey unilateral and

coersive approach. It posed a major vulnerability in

the region that can be a threat not just to existing

country in the region, but also to all of its human

security such as disaster management, sustainable

development, financial independence, etc.

Neighboring counterparts such as Indonesia and

Philippines also facing threat to its integrity and

stability by this potential event. In this region,

where there are plenty of Indonesia’s domestic

issues which need to be resolved such as keeping

Papua integrated to Indonesia, human rights,

Melanesian Spearhead Groups (MSG), maritime

security, United Liberation Movement of West

Papua as well as clash of interest with extra-regional

actors, is a prime example of threat Indonesia facing

in the region if its condition increasingly become

unstable.

Indonesia recent action according to Dynamic

Equibillirium as its core principle had shown that

Indonesia tends to less concern regarding

multilateral process and problem solving in South

Pacific region. While in previous section of this

journal had shown that Indonesia tends to posed as

middle power actor that put forward peace building

and multilateral process, its still missing the specific

strategies to preserve its security interests in South

Pacific region. Ralf Emmer in his regional security

theory explicate that in order for a middle power

actor exert their influence and assert their interest in

specific areas of international affairs, they must

adopted a specific strategic to each region, in which

it refers to a state’s plan of action to achieve its

national interests within the geographic region it is

located. In this case, Indonesia must make its own

specific strategy within the South Pacific region.

From the historical context of Indonesia and the

current advancement of this country, there are direct

and non-direct pressures for Indonesia where some

countries having an expectation that Indonesia can

have role and power in international forum including

South Pacific in order the status of Indonesia

regionally and globally changing. With this potential

however, Indonesia needs to maintain a very carefull

approach and strategic building into the region,

especially asserting in responding issues in South

Pacific as well as securing national interests which

can threaten the bilateral and multilateral

relationship with other countries in wide range of

subject. For instance, to promote peace and stability

in South Pacific as one of the basic instrument of

Indonesia foreign policy, its still impeded by the

inadequate physical security infrastructure such as

military base and armaments which need to be

deployed in outer Indonesia’s territory near South

Pacific to contain security threats. In line with the

President Joko Widodo “World Maritime Axis”, as

middle power and the changing regional order in

South Pacific, Indonesia has to face China in

acquiring influence in South Pacific. It can be

reflected that there are several points in which

Indonesia need to reconsider when Indonesia want to

assert regarding the United Liberation Movement of

West Papua and Freeport. First challenge for

Indonesia is political dynamic as well as political

characteristics of both countries leaders. Another

important challenge for Indonesia is regarding

human rights issue. For this case, when Indonesia

The Missing Link between Dynamic Equilibrium Doctrine and Indonesia’s Interest in South Paciﬁc

135

plays as middle power in advocating human rights

issue, they should consider about international

conventions and track records of government of

Indonesia in tackling human rights issue within

Papua.

Based on the substance however, there are

several challenges which Indonesia needs to face

when it comes to applying their middle power role in

South Pacific. The insufficient resources that

Indonesia possess is still become a major obstacle in

securing their national interests. Another one is as a

middle power actor, Indonesia need to be able to be

independent as well as assertive in international

forum when it comes to responding issues which

related to national interests as well as avoiding

international criticism and external interference. As

middle power theory stating that to be a middle

power, country should have adequate capacity in

influencing the decision of great powers, as clearly

state in functional theory approach. Emmer observe

Indonesia current regional security strategy that

tends to be more behavioural, in which its focusing

on multilateralism and based on normative

foundation. This implementation is affected by

Indonesia low resources availability and low-threat

strategic environment. In here, Indonesia should

improve her resources availability while at the same

time playing its behavioural approach strategy to

South Pacific region. With the goals of sufficient

resources availability as well as low-threat strategic

enviornment that already perceived in ASEAN

region, and bringing Indonesia to a mixed approach,

both by functional and behavioural principle. This

security strategy could make Indonesia be able to

influencing the decision of extra-regional actors

within South Pacific and their interests to balance

the atmosphere, while at the same time be able to

build trust and multilateral assembly through

peacemaking building in the region.

6 INDONESIA CAPABILITY TO

INVOLVE IN SOUTH PACIFIC

To accelerate and forge Indonesia’s role as middle

power in South Pacific, there are several

international forums which can be used by Indonesia

such as ASEAN, ASEAN+, ARF, ADMM and

Pacific Island Forum. Besides that, Indonesia also

have physical security infrastructure such as

Lantamal XIV Sorong West Papua, Koopsau III in

Biak (still in progress) and Kodam in several areas

in Papua. The supportive atmosphere between TNI,

POLRI and government is the key resources to

support Ministry of Foreign Affairs and President in

playing middle power in South Pacific. But with the

recent development of uncertainty in ASEAN

centrality, some scholars conviced Indonesia to

going on its own way instead depending on ASEAN

centrality.

Plenty of agenda which Indonesia can do as

middle power in South Pacific such as advocating

human rights issue, security matters, balancing the

hotspots within South Pacific which dominated by

the major powers, promote peace and stability.

Although there are many countries having “Indo-

Pacific” concept such as United States of America,

China, Japan and Russia, Indonesia also has its own

“Indo-Pacific” concept which mostly emphasizing

on internalizing and nurturing habit of dialogue,

inclusiveness as well as cooperation in any sensitive

issues. South Pacific gives Indonesia great

opportunity to disseminate “Indo-Pacific” concept.

Indonesia also can accelerate “the World Maritime

Axis” vision in South Pacific using middle power to

create peace in South Pacific by shifting the trend to

commerce. Thus, it can shift the attention of extra-

regional actor from security matters especially

territorial integration to the economic issues

although it would have only little effect. By

accelerating “the World Maritime Axis”, it also can

be a momentum for Indonesia to prevent any

interference and international criticism toward her

national interests and territorial integration regarding

Papua. Indonesia also can launch “dynamic

equilibrium” to promote peace in region by reducing

tensions in South Pacific hotspots. Its also

correlating with both middle power role Indonesia

playing and security strategy theory by Ralf Emmer,

In which as previous section had explained that

South Pacific is facing an uncertainty as well as

rapidly changing political dynamics in the region.

Basically, Indonesia secure advantage in this

situation in which its recent development and

principal ide is suitable with South Pacific

geopolitics situation to meddle in and fulfill its

national interest in the region, especially regarding

Papua integrity issue.

The term “One Million Friends and Zero

Enemies” refer to the strategic environment where

there is no country perceives Indonesia as enemy

and vice versa. The strategic environment of “One

Million Friends and Zero Enemies” helps Indonesia

to not stick in inter-polarity dichotomy. This helps to

change the “turbulent ocean” where international

relations seem to be unpredictable and polarity

became more complex into balance multi-polarity

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

136

without single dominant power or “Dynamic

Equilibrium”. Another strategic environment which

needs to be created in South Pacific is one million

friends not only country but also including

individual. The strategic environment should be

supported by the concept of Indo-Pacific to avoid

unfavorable perception and international criticism.

The current situation in which Indonesia government

under Joko Widodo attempting to improve Indonesia

human rights reputation and perception, as well as

specific development focus on Papua region is

crucial in winning people’s heart in South Pacific to

create a complete strategic environment because

today’s international relations is related with people

to people interaction and due to the existence of

Melanesian Spearhead Groups and the United

Liberation Movement of West Papua which

searching for supports from individual, thus

Indonesia should not only have million friends of

country but also individual who can support

Indonesia meddling with South Pacific region in

accordance with its national interests to further

improve its reputation and middle power role

throughout the region. The strategic environment

also including balancing the presence of extra-

regional actors to gain support, influence and

reducing the tension as well as uncertainty in

hotspots.

7 CONCLUSION

As a geopolitically strategic country within the Asia-

Pacific region, Indonesia has great influence over

the reins of international politics. Indonesia has

proven itself to be capable of gaining new allies and

forming a sustainable relationship with them. The

South Pacific region is a potential diplomatic partner

that has yet to be further developed. Through its

dynamic equilibrium doctrine, Indonesia may have a

chance to become one of the South Pacific’s

stronger middle powers. Even so, Indonesia must

first assert its position among the great powers that

reside within the South Pacific in order to gain a

firmer standing of its influence within the region.

Furthermore, an Indonesian-South Pacific

cooperation may prove to be beneficial in future

alliances should both parties create a mutual

standing based on cooperation and sustainable

development.

REFERENCES

Aizawa, Nobuhiro, 2015, “Indonesia’s Foreign Policy

Takes an Economic Turn”, East Asia Forum.

Allan, George H., 2005, “South Pacific Security and the

Emerging Doctrine of ‘Cooperative Intervention’: the

Pacific way of Howard’s way”, Rhizome 1, pp. 125-

144, retrieved June 21 2018

Anwar, Dewi Fortuna, 2014, “Indonesia’s Foreign

Relations: Policy Shaped by the Ideal of ‘Dynamic

Equilibrium’”, East Asia Forum.

Azizian, Rouben; Cramer, Carleton, 2015, Regionalism,

Security & Cooperation in Oceania, Asia-Pacific

Center of Security Studies, Honolulu.

Carafano, James J., et al., 2017, “How America and Its

Indo-Pacific Allies Will Redefine Regional Security”,

The National Interest.

Claxton, Karl, 2013, “Securing the South Pacific: Making

the most of Australia’s renewed regional focus”,

Australian Strategic Policy Institut Strategic Insights,

retrieved June 21 2018.

Cruden, Michaela, 2011, Regional Security Complex

Theory: Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, Thesis,

University of Waikato, retrieved June 22 2018.

Darmosumarto, Santo, 2013, “Indonesia and the Asia

Pacific: Opportunities and Challenges for Middle

Power Diplomacy,” retrieved 21 June 2018,

http://www.gmfus.org/publications/indonesia-and-

asia-pacific-opportunities-and-challenges-middle-

power-diplomacy

Emmers, Ralf, 2015, “Regional Security Strategis of

Middle Power in the Asia-Pacific”, International

Relations of Asia-Pacific, vol 15, no.1, pp. 185-216

Falahi, Ziyad, 2013, “Memikirkan Kembali Arti Million

Friends Zero Enemy dalam Era Paradox of Plenty,”

Global & Strategis, no 2, pp. 228-235, retrieved on

June 21

2018.

Holmes, John W., 1965, “Is There a Future for

Middlepowermanship?”, in J. King Gordon ed.

Canada’s Role as a Middle Power, vol. 13, no. 38, pp.

15-16, The Canadian Institute of International Affairs,

Toronto.

Kurlantzick, Joshua, 2012, ASEAN’s Future and Asian

Integration, International Institutions and Global

Governance Program.

Lanteigne, Marc, 2016, “Water dragon? China, power

shifts and soft balancing in the South Pacific”,

Political Science, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 21-38, DOI:

10.1177/0032318712447732

Pandjaitan, Luhut B., 2018, “Indonesia Ready to Take on

Bigger Role in Indo-Pacific,” retrieved 22 June 2018,

https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/indonesia-

ready-to-take-on-bigger-role-in-indo-pacific

Piccone, Ted; Yusman, Bimo, 2014, “Indonesian Foreign

Policy: A Million Friends and Zero Enemies”,

retrieved 19 June 2018,

https://thediplomat.com/2014/02/indonesian-foreign-

policy-a-million-friends-and-zero-enemies/

Poling, Gregory B., 2018, “Dynamic Equilibrium:

Indonesia’s Blueprint for a 21

Century Asia Pacific”,

The Missing Link between Dynamic Equilibrium Doctrine and Indonesia’s Interest in South Paciﬁc

137

The New Southbound Policy | Center for Strategic and

International Studies.

Reilly, Benjamin, 2002, “Internal Conflict and Regional

Security in Asia and the Pacific”, Pacifica Review:

Peace, Security & Global Change, vol. 14, no. 1, pp.

7-21, DOI: 10.1080/13239100120114345

Rizki, Rahmat M., 2016, Konsepsi Dynamic Equilibrium

sebagai Artikulasi Politik Luar Negeri Indonesia di

Asia Pasifik, Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta.

Shibuya, Eric, 2004, “The Problems and Potential of the

Pacific Islands forum”, The Asia-Pacific: A region in

transition, pp. 102-115, retrieved 22 June 2018,

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=j33Qu8IAA

AAJ&hl=id

Thakur, Ramesh, 1991, The South Pacific: Problems,

Issues and Prospect, Palgrave Macmillan, United

Kingdom.

Wallis, Joanne, 2015, “The South Pacific: ‘arc of

instability’ or ‘arc of opportunity’?”, Global Change,

Peace & Security, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 39-53, DOI:

10.1080/14781158.2015.992010

Yamasaki, Michi, 2009, A Study of Middle Power

Diplomacy as a Strategy of Leadership and Influence,

University of Waterloo, Canada.

Zhang, Yongjin 2007, “China and the emerging regional

order in the South Pacific”, Australian Journal of

International Affairs, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 367-381, DOI:

10.1080/10357710701531537

Adamrah, Mustaqim, 2011, “Myanmar set to become chair

ASEAN: FM”, retrieved 16 November 2011, The

Jakarta Post.

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

138