The Development of Indonesian Maritime Thinking in a Security

Perspective

Agus Trihartono, Abubakar Eby Hara and Muhammad Iqbal

Universitas Jember

Keywords: Global Maritime Fulcrum, Indonesia Foreign Policy, Maritime Security, Maritime Thinking, Traditional

Security

Abstract: This paper discusses the development of views on Indonesia maritime from the perspective of security theory.

This article sees that the view of the maritime world is still very much dominated by the traditional view of

security which emphasises military threats to Indonesian territory. The dominance of such views to a certain

degree has ruled out the importance of aspects of non-traditional security threats such as the security of the

marine environment and sea sources and has also made a lack of attention to the development of marine

resources for a long time.

1 INTRODUCTION

This paper discusses the development of views on the

importance of sea and maritime for Indonesia from a

security perspective. In this paper, the concept of

security is divided into two parts, namely traditional

and non-traditional security. Traditional security is

associated with armed threats to the security and

sovereignty of the state while non-traditional security

relates primarily to broader threats such as

economics, social, political and environmental to

individuals (Buzan et al., 1998). This paper sees that

the difficulties in realising Indonesia as a maritime

country are partly related to traditional security views

that are still dominant.

Discussions about Indonesia as a maritime state

from security concepts are essential in several ways.

First, the dominant view of security threats provides

an overview of how policy will be taken. The view

does not directly affect policy, but from the dominant

view that develops, one can understand the direction

and orientation of decision makers at a time. The

security paradigm becomes the focus of attention of

this paper because the discourse on the development

of the Indonesian maritime world is inseparable from

the views on the security of the Republic of Indonesia

(RI). The crucial concepts such as the archipelagic



The institutions are, among others, Navy (TNI-AL), the

Police, the Civil Service Investigators of ten different

state, Wawasan Nusantara (archipelago insight) and

the Global Maritime Fulcrum (GMF) have a security

assumption behind it.

Second, the discussion of the development of

Indonesia's maritime views is still under-discussed in

various literature. Generally, studies are more

directed at obstacles and practical efforts to develop

maritime. Material aspects like this are, of course,

important because people may have concrete

solutions. However, this view cannot describe the

slow development of Indonesian maritime, and the

slow change in mindset, which in this case has caused

the sea to be long neglected. The sea, for example, is

considered not to be a 'front page' or starting point for

development and defence strategies. This paper,

therefore, attempts to fill this gap.

In our literature review, generally studies on

Indonesia's maritime future are associated with a lack

of elite commitment (Syalendra, 2017), lack of funds

and infrastructure (Latifah and Larasati, 2017). Lack

of commitment makes it difficult to make a

convincing and compact decision to develop

maritime resources, especially with the presence of

around 13 institutions that take care of the sea without

coordination (Agastia, 2017).

Likewise, a lot of

analysis was done to discuss the challenges of

infrastructure development, logistics and coast guard

capabilities (Sambhi, 2015).

ministries – including Customs and Fisheries – and the

fledgling Maritime Security Agency (Bakamla).

Trihartono, A., Hara, A. and Iqbal, M.

The Development of Indonesian Maritime Thinking in a Security Perspective.

DOI: 10.5220/0010281400002309

In Proceedings of Airlangga Conference on International Relations (ACIR 2018) - Politics, Economy, and Security in Changing Indo-Paciﬁc Region, pages 635-640

ISBN: 978-989-758-493-0

635

Third, regarding to the two things above, the main

problem in Indonesia's maritime development is

paradigmatic

in that there lies a dominant view that

places the sea from the aspect of the threat of military

security. The dominant paradigm has not made the

sea essential and urgent for the development and

progress of the Indonesian economy for many years.

Therefore, the development of the dominant view of

the sea needs to have a place in analysing the

Indonesian maritime world. The answer to this

problem cannot be sought only from material causes

such as lack of facilities, infrastructure and resources,

because even countries with limited marine resources

can become strong maritime countries both regarding

their maritime and economic capabilities.

2 METHODS

Our paper is based on research on how ideas,

discourses and views develop and become dominant.

Investigations on ideas and discourses have become

one of the most interesting and developing methods

to date (Checkel, 2017). In constructivism theories,

for example, there is an assumption that what is

essential to pay attention to is not the material or the

events, but the ideas and how people interpret the

events. Of course, the events that occur are essential

but what is more important to pay attention to is how

ideas or views are formed and strengthened and how

people give meaning to those events. These

strengthening views intertwine into an agreement of

the subjects which are often referred to as

intersubjective understanding and become a kind of

social facts such as practices, institutions, values,

assumptions and norms that must be revealed by the

researcher (Jackson and Sørensen, 2006).

Departing from such methodological

assumptions, we try to explore some views about

Indonesia as a maritime state and how the views are

fought for and intertwine with each other. We use

interviews and literature searches to find similarities

and differences in views about the concept of the

Indonesian maritime country. We conducted

interviews with more than 20 experts and

practitioners whose works relate to the maritime

world. Then this is complemented by views obtained



Apart from academic understanding, the notion of

paradigm is also used in terms of "world view". This

relates to terms relating to experience, beliefs and values

that affect the way a person feels reality and responds to

that perception. In this context "paradigm shift" means a

change in how a particular society regulates and

through seminars pertaining to maritime issues. Data

from interviews were strengthened by a literature

review of the conceptions of Indonesian maritime

world both written by domestic and foreign experts.

The selection of respondents was carried out

through a combination of criteria of expertise, their

involvement and figure about the Indonesian

maritime world. Expertise related to their views and

relevant publications as reference material. The

practitioners interviewed were due to their experience

and involvement with the maritime world. We also

see the figure of the person based on media reports

and references from experts. This literature study

complements each other and becomes part of the

triangulation process to ensure the correctness of the

interview results or vice versa. We also try to get

information about Juanda Declaration, the struggle to

get recognition from the international community at

the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea

(UNCLOS), how it was received, then how the

concept of the archipelagic state was included in the

grand Wawasan Nusantara concept. We also try to

explore data about crucial moments in which the term

archipelago state (Negara Kepulauan) develops into

a maritime state. This paradigmatic change is

explored from interviews and the written materials

3 RESULTS

Indonesia is the largest archipelagic country on the

planet which has tremendous marine assets. The

country also has sovereignty over the deep sea in the

concept of archipelagic state recognised by UNCLOS

since 1982. In its history, Indonesia, with vast seas

and rivers covering 70 per cent of its regions, also has

maritime kingdoms and seafarers who sailed as far as

Australia and Taiwan. However, Indonesia is not

considered a maritime country in the sense that the

source of income for the country does not originate

from marine resources. In contrast to countries that

are not considered archipelago states such as

Singapore, Korea and Japan whose industry and

economy come from trade and transport by sea,

Indonesia does not make the sea a significant source

of the economy and industry.

understands reality. The "dominant paradigm" refers to

values, or systems of thought, in the most standardized

and widely held societies at certain times. The dominant

paradigm is shaped both by the cultural background of the

community and by the context of historical moments.

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

636

In our search, the concept of security plays a vital

role in the thinking and policies taken regarding to

Indonesian maritime affairs. This paper divides the

development of the thinking into three parts. The first

period viewed in the period after independence till the

issuance of the Juanda Declaration. The second

period was after the issuance of the Juanda

Declaration until the recognition of the principle of

the archipelagic state. The third period was after the

fall of President Suharto or during the democratic

system.

In the first period, in various literature, views on

the archipelago and the concerns of vulnerable

Indonesia can be found from Muhammad Yamin's

statement before the Konstituante who wanted the

territory of Indonesia covering Malaysia which he

considered as would make Indonesia more protected

and safe (Butcher, 2009). Although the idea was

challenged because it was considered as expansionist

by Hatta, concerns about the Indonesian archipelago

continued.

In the late 1950s, a committee was conducted to

study the issue of sea sovereignty, but this group

worked slowly so that Chairul Saleh challenged

Mochtar Kusumaatmadja a marine law expert to find

the best way to obtain Indonesia sovereignty over its

deep sea. The government at that time wanted

protection for the Indonesian sea area which was

freely used by the Dutch government to terrorise the

Indonesian government which was fighting to liberate

West Irian.

Mochtar then proposed the boundaries of

Indonesia's sovereignty by drawing from the outer

ends of the outer islands that surrounded Indonesia,

so that Indonesia controlled the deep sea that

separated the islands so far. The deep sea was

previously free sea because the sovereign boundary

from the original land was only three nautical miles.

Mochtar's proposal was later adopted by Prime

Minister Djuanda in 1957 and declared to be the so-

called Juanda Doctrine.

The second period in the development of maritime

thinking is the period of the struggle for the concept

to be recognised internationally. The concept was

challenged by various countries that had the principle

that the sea belongs to all. The challenges mainly

came from large countries that feel their marine

interests were threatened. Indonesia, therefore,

needed to think about how to overcome this challenge

and still at the same time have its sovereignty over the

sea. One of the proposed proposals is the provision of



Interview with Ambassador Hasjim Djalal, Jakarta 23

May 2018.

free passages for large ships to pass through

Indonesia.

In the atmosphere of the active rejection, the

struggle for recognition of Indonesia sea sovereignty

was tough. From the figure directly involved in this

process, Hasyim Djalal told how the struggle for

international recognition. According to Djalal,

Mochtar Kusumaatmaja was very involved in this

process. He negotiated everywhere and was

sometimes assisted by Djalal. According to Djalal, his

position was only as a batter that brought Indonesia's

position as challenging as possible in various forums,

and Professor Mochtar just finished and searched for

a solution.

From the hearing to the hearing

Indonesia's position was strengthened and gained

support, so that finally in the UNCLOS III in 1982 the

principle of the archipelagic state was approved.

When Sukarno was replaced, President Suharto

also continued this struggle. Even in 1975, the

struggle for the concept of an archipelago state was

considered a part to strengthen the concept of the

Wawasan Nusantara (Lemhannas, 1982; Pane,

2015). The Wawasan Nusantara is a comprehensive

concept in the form of insight into Indonesia that

covers all aspects of ideology, politics, economics,

social, culture, defence and security. President

Suharto gave Mochtar a broader opportunity to

promote this concept, especially when he became

Foreign Minister for two periods (1978-1988) (Pane,

2015). The legal approaches are then continued to

resolve the boundaries of the Republic of Indonesia

affected by the UNCLOS decision particularly with

neighbouring countries such as Singapore, Malaysia,

the Philippines and Australia.

The third period in the development of maritime

thinking was during the post-Suharto era. Although

sovereignty over the deep sea was recognised,

attention to the use of marine assets only emerged

when the New Order government under Suharto fell.

There have been many talks that the Indonesia sea is

neglected, and its resources were under-explored. The

Habibie government that replaced Suharto did not

have time to work on the sea because of his busy work

to make political reform and to overcome the problem

of East Timor. However, during the time of President

Abdurrahman Wahid, attention to the maritime world

began to reappear. President Wahid heard various

proposals in the community and finally decided to

form the Ministry of Maritime Affairs. He also

rotated the armed forces chief of staff who had always

been the right of the Army to all forces. After the

Interview with Ambassador Hasjim Djalal, Jakarta 23

May 2018.

The Development of Indonesian Maritime Thinking in a Security Perspective

637

change of President to Megawati and then to

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono the Ministry

was maintained, even though its function was not yet

real. Attention to the function of this ministry is also

not significant as evidenced by the small facilities

including offices at the beginning.

However, this change, from several studies and

interviews, has not changed much marine policy.

Indonesian sea defence, in general, was also not

developed because defence design remained normal

with an emphasis on the superiority of the Army in

strategic planning (Marzuki, 2018). In one interview,

it was also said that the sea was still not seriously

protected because the Navy's ability was not

significantly improved and there was no specific

strategy originating from the sea.

Similarly, Arif and Kurniawan (2017) say that

defence design that sees domestic threats as the main

threat has become a strategic culture that

overshadows the Navy's reluctance to play a

prominent role in defending Indonesia's sea from

external threats. Various resource persons such as

Daniel and a Naval Officer

showed that attention to

the sea was still far away. The paradigm in the

community has not changed much. They still see land

as a starting point for thinking and even consider the

sea to be just an extension of the land, such as in the

thought of building bridges between islands.

In the survey conducted by CSIS between April

and May 2013, the definition of security was still

dominated by threats to national security. The study

shows that 34 per cent of respondents, for example,

consider terrorism a threat and 19 per cent consider

border incursion as a threat. Also, other threats

include foreign aggression and communism are also

included in the perception of threats to the country.

The only non-traditional security issue that gets

attention is climate change, which is 1 per cent.

Although the GMF has been declared, the

dominance of the view is also still on seeing

Indonesia's security from the security aspect against

the threat of Indonesian sovereignty. As said by

Syailendra (2017), in dealing with China, the main

actors in Indonesia's policymaking, see the threat as a

threat to the integrity and sovereignty of the Republic

of Indonesia. President Jokowi, for example, ensured



Speech of Mr. Havas Oegroseno, Indonesia Deputy

Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, at The Asia

Foundation, Washington DC, Apr 1, 2016.

Anonymous Interview with a Navy Commander, Jakarta,

May 24, 2018

Anonymous Interview with a Navy Commander, Jakarta,

May 24, 2018

that China would not interfere with Indonesia's

sovereignty by supporting efforts to arrest Chinese

ships. Meanwhile, the Navy wants an increase in the

budget to protect the Indonesian sea area. The

Ministry of Foreign Affairs in its capacity also tries

to defend the territory of Indonesia's sovereignty

through diplomacy and engagement with China. In

this context, only the Ministry of Marine Affairs and

Fisheries is concerned about non-traditional security

aspects, especially for managing marine resources as

part of food security for Indonesia.

4 DISCUSSION

The findings above show that the debate about

Indonesia's maritime world is still dominated by and

defined in term of military security threats. Of course,

the discussion is significant for Indonesia's vast sea

area. However, more than that, concepts such as the

Wawasan Nusantara that combine both land and sea

dimensions turned out to be developing more towards

land heavy. The defence strategy remains designed to

overcome internal security problems such as terrorists

and separatists and ideological threats such as

communists and radical Islamic groups. In other

words, the concepts of archipelagic state and

Wawasan Nusantara does not bring changes to

security strategies, especially in dealing with external

enemies that threaten Indonesia's marine sovereignty.

Our findings show that Indonesia has indeed won

its sovereignty over the sea at UNCLOS. In the

context of the international order, this is a significant

contribution. As stated by Oegroseno (2009), this is

Indonesia's contribution to the world or in Acharya's

terms, Indonesia contributes to "norm subsidiarity"

(Acharya, 2011). This perspective also shows that

third world countries like Indonesia are active agents

in understanding international concepts introduced by

Western countries. Indonesia adjusts the sovereignty

aspect with its geographical needs and strives to get it

in the world. With UNCLOS, Indonesia invites

neighbours to comply with international regulations.

According to Oegroseno (2009), if we do not refer to

this rule, how we can relate well in modern society

Speech of Muhammad Daniel on Workshop of Global

Maritime Fulcrum, University of Jember, 4 June 2018.

Speech of Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries of the

Republic of Indonesia, Ms. Susi Pudjiastuti at the RSIS

Distinguished Public Lecture 27 August 2015.

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

638

today. Western countries can be a reference and

example to solve sea problems.

However, the security and sovereignty paradigms

continue to change. If third world countries,

especially those who are members of ASEAN, still

strongly emphasise the principle of military threats

and territorial sovereignty, such as non-intervention

on the affairs of other countries, the international

world begins to open itself by seeing sovereignty

more flexible. This facts was driven by cases of

poverty and hunger that require humanitarian

intervention. Likewise, the case of torture or massacre

of citizens by a country raises the demands of a

country to fulfil its responsibility to protect.

In our analysis, the slow attention to the potential

of the sea is because Indonesia is still fixated on the

traditional definition of sovereignty which

emphasizes the principle of non-intervention even

though the world has changed. So, when we have

obtained sea sovereignty, some consider the struggle

is over, and we can be calmer and feel safe because

the area is legally protected and recognized by the

international community. This feeling of calm is also

needed to enable development to continue. However,

development, in this case, seems to be done in the

context of land development from natural resources

such as mining and timber and ignore sea potentials.

Likewise, agriculture is a concern with considerations

for advancing Indonesian villages that are left

behind.In a further study, we see that the Indonesia

weak maritime vision and identity is also related to

how the government understands national security. In

various concepts, security is often defined as

traditional and non-traditional security. Traditional

security is defined as security from military threats

and other armed conflicts against the state and is

therefore state-centric. While non-traditional security

is an expansion of security threats which includes

non-military threats such as economic,

environmental, social and political, directed not only

at the state but also at the individuals. In Indonesia,

the threat to the authority of the state has so far

originated from within the country. Some come from

areas that want to be independent or to get more

equitable development treatment. The rebels also

came from the land not from the sea and because of

that Indonesia developed the Army as the central

pillar of defence and neglected the Navy and Air

Force which were considered to have no threat

because their operations were not on land.

Although GMF has already been declared,

business, as usual, applies to marine activities

(Marzuki, 2018). Even in the defence sector, the

Indonesian Navy is reluctant to play a dominant role

where they should develop as part of GMF (Arif and

Kurniawan, 2017). In current terms, the sea remains

a backyard, not a front page. In the GNF, the view of

traditional security in safeguarding sea sovereignty

also occurs with the sinking of foreign ships,

including the clashes with the Chinese coast guard in

the Natuna Sea. People really appreciate President

Jokowi's move to challenge China’s threat in that

region and saw that as courage to uphold Indonesia's

sovereignty from every foreign threat. In short, the

traditional security paradigm remains the dominant

view in Indonesia in viewing the maritime world

5 CONCLUSIONS

This paper shows that the understanding of security

conception is fundamental in Indonesian maritime

discourse. Indonesian security has long been defined

in three important and related matters. First, security

is defined as the enforcement of territorial

sovereignty that is free from foreign intervention.

Therefore, Indonesia needs de jure recognition of its

land and sea. Second, this paradigm is reinforced

from geographical assumptions and historical

experiences. The geographical assumption is that

Indonesia is a country that is strategically located and

rich in natural resources that makes other countries

want to intervene. Third, historical experience in

upholding Indonesia's sovereignty and unity,

especially in the New Order era, was defined as

coming from domestic security threats such as

communists and separatist groups.

This paper does not assume that such discourses

is not essential but wants to explain that such views

have marginalized the importance of the sea in the

lives of Indonesian people. Understanding of the

narrow and undeveloped security conception make

people believe that security threats are only military

threats. This is in many ways directing development

priorities and defence orientations within the

domestic area and ignoring maritime development. In

the future, the campaign to change people's thinking

paradigm that the sea is not only crucial in the context

of sovereignty but also relevant to be managed for the

welfare of society is one of the essential conditions

for continued development towards Indonesia's

maritime glory.

REFERENCES

Acharya, A. (2011) ‘Norm Subsidiarity and Regional

Orders: Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Rule-Making in

The Development of Indonesian Maritime Thinking in a Security Perspective

639

the Third World’. International Studies Quarterly,

55(1), pp. 95–123

I.G.B. Dharma Agastia, The Diplomat, (2018). 3 Years

Later, Where Is Indonesia’s ‘Global Maritime

Fulcrum’? | The Diplomat [Online] Available at:

https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/3-years-later-where-

is-indonesias-global-maritime-fulcrum/ [Accessed

16/9/2018].

Arif, M. and Kurniawan, Y. (2018) ‘Strategic Culture and

Indonesian Maritime Security’, Asia and the Pacific

Policy Studies, 5(1), pp. 77–89. doi: 10.1002/app5.203.

Butcher, J. G. (2009) “Becoming an Archipelagic State:

The Juanda Declaration of 1957 and the ‘Struggle’ to

Gain International Recognition of the Archipelagic

Principle,” in Cribb, R. and Ford, M. (eds) Indonesia

beyond the Water's Edge: Managing an Archipelagic

State. ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, pp. 28–48.

Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & Wilde, J. D. (1998). Security: a

new framework for analysis. Boulder, Colo, Lynne

Rienner Pub.

Checkel, J. T. (2018) ‘Methods in constructivist

approaches’, The Oxford Handbook of International

Security, (55), pp. 152–166. doi:

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198777854.013.11.

Gindarsah, I. and Priamarizki, A. (2015) ‘Indonesia’s

Maritime Doctrine and Security Concerns’, RSiS

Nanyang Technology University, (April), p. 15.

Available at: https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-

content/uploads/2015/04/PR150409_Indonesias-

Maritime-Doctrine.pdf.

Jackson, R. H., & Sørensen, G. (2007). Introduction to

international relations: theories and approaches.

Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Larasati, L. D. (2017) ‘Tantangan Internal dalam

Mewujudkan Indonesia Sebagai Poros Maritim Dunia

Latifah & Dinda Larasati Universitas Muhammadiyah

Malang Abstrak Terpilihnya presiden Joko Widodo (

Jokowi ) pada pemilihan presiden 2014 merupakan

langkah awal bagi corak pembangun’, Hubungan

Internasional, 10(2), pp. 99–116. Available at:

http://polair.polri.go.id/profil-polair/%0Atugas-pokok-

visi-dan-misi/ [Accessed 16/9/2018].

Lemhanas. (1982) Principles of Understanding and History

of the Development of Archipelago Insight (Pokok-

Pokok Pengertian dan Sejarah Perkembangan Wawasan

Nusantara), in Bunga Rampai Wawasan Nusantara 2,

(Jakarta Lemhannas), pp. 83-108.

Marzuki, K. I. (2018) ‘The Meaning of Indonesia’s Global

Maritime Fulcrum’, (14A). Available at:

https://www.pacforum.org/analysis/pacnet-14a-

meaning-indonesias-global-maritime-fulcrum.

Oegroseno, A. H. (2009) 3 Indonesia’s Maritime

Boundaries. In Robert Cribb, Michele Ford (Eds.),

Indonesia beyond the Water's Edge: Managing an

Archipelagic State (pp. 49–58). Singapore: ISEAS–

Yusof Ishak Institute Singapore.

https://doi.org/10.1355/9789812309815-007

Pane, N. (2015) Rekam Jejak Kebangsaan Mochtar

Kusuma-Atmadja. Jakarta, Kompas.

Sambhi, N. (2015) ‘Jokowi’s “ Global Maritime Axis ”:

Smooth Sailing or Rocky Seas Ahead ?’, Security

Challenges, 11(2), pp. 39–55.

ACIR 2018 - Airlangga Conference on International Relations

640