A Critical Review of "Regional Order by Means? Examining The Rise of Defense Diplomacy in Southeast Asia"

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 7

A CRITICAL REVIEW OF “REGIONAL ORDER BY MEANS?

EXAMINING THE RISE OF DEFENSE DIPLOMACY IN


SOUTHEAST ASIA”

Rizky Setiawan

1. Introduction

Speaking of which, the terms of defense diplomacy is the conditions of nonviolent


implementation of military forces through such activities like officer exchanges, giving an aid
army to the others state to further a state’s international schedule or agenda. This term
occasionally created in response to post-Cold War to name a new task and its function to the
world by the auspicious under military forces and Ministry of National Defense. According to
David Baldwin (2016), the concept of security should be carefully emphasized by determining
sort of security terms and conditions that are expected by individuals and groups.

In the article by Evan Laksamana (2012) entitled “Regional Order by Means? Examining
The Rise of Defense Diplomacy in Southeast Asia”, he examines the excuses as well as the
implementation of defense security which seems increasingly significant for the last decade in
Southeast Asia. This study also critically examines the relation amongst ASEAN, ARF, and
Indonesia’s bilateral defense diplomacy. Furthermore, this study consists three school of thoughts
regarding the uptrend of defense diplomacy, they are:

1) The variety of defense diplomacy of Southeast Asia, in terms of bilateral and


multilateral conditions, which are inextricably linked.
2) The aim of the defense diplomacy have been grown and reflects the differences
between conventional and modern security issues.
3) The developing amount of ARF’s multilateral of defense diplomacy which linked to
the rise and doubt of China’s power as well as the development of arms during
monetary crisis in Asia Pacific on 1996.
The author attempts to limit his research merely to focus on defense diplomacy by
assessing its form such as unpack the huge complexity of defense diplomacy as one of the main
way to reach certain regional order specifically in Southeast Asia.

According to David Capie in his paper entitled “Structures, Shocks and Norm Change:
Explaining the Late Rise of Asia’s Defence Diplomacy”, he depicts that the Asia’s multilateral
diplomacy in defense subject can be called as a slow-movement forms compare to the others of
institutionalized security discourse as well as the explanation of recent growth. He found that the
critical the stress of “catalyctic role” of external shocks or changes in power distribution are
underdetermining.

He also explains the variable in which related to the late of multilateral defense diplomacy
in Asia is because this major factors. Firstly, the instrumental and normative explanation where
the imbalance of threats that impacts many Southeast Asia states during Cold War persecution.
For instance, many Southeast Asia region, including Indonesia, were occupied by the state-
making and internal security problem than the changing security order in each region.

David also analyze that due the dramatic external shocks or changes in the balance of
power or threat, the Asia’s multilateral defense diplomacy can be defined as an incremental
process where formed a pivotal ways by Southeast Asia pre-existing institutions.

Therefore, in this paper, the writer wants to critically review the result of a research article
by Evan in “Regional Order by Means? Examining The Rise of Defense Diplomacy in Southeast
Asia” in order to obtain such a knowledge regarding the defense diplomacy in specific region of
Southeast Asia and fulfilling the academic inquiries.

2. Discussion
2.1 Defense Diplomacy and Southeast Asia Security
Speaking of general, the defense diplomacy has been becoming the most-
discussed occasion in many discourses. Since the sophisticated policy related to war, the
threat towards the implementation of army force to grasp such foreign-policy aims has
become a mandatory regulations that occurs in worldwide system. Specifically, “gunboat
diplomacy” is the terms for historical occasion by Japan which convinced the Tokugawa
Shogunate to be opened in free-market with the power state such as USA.
On the other hand, the case of South China Sea reminded many states to the
relevance of army force to rely on foreign policy to be more objective. However, there is
an anomaly in post-Cold War era due to the heat of competitiveness between USA and
Uni Soviet. Hence, the new form of defense policy arises and become a common
discussion amongst defense ministry in each states. For instance, inter alia is the form of
various bilateral and multilateral diplomacy which involved many entity like senior
military defense officer and civilian defense officials, the exchange of army force, ship
visits, the propose of military tools and aids, and so on.
By the new form of regional order, in Southeast Asia, the policymakers strive to
uphold some sort of order such as :
1) Maintaining the ASEAN’s centrality in each region’s relation
2) Lessen the likelihood of open warfare or conflicts among each states in
Southeast Asian
3) Maintaining the beneficial relation in mutual ways with extraregional powers
4) Fully supported such in economically aspect that affected in enhancing GDP
of one region.

2.2 Multilateral Defense Diplomacy in Southeast Asia: Issues and Trends

There are numerous cases related to the activities of multilateral diplomacy which
have occurred in 1994 to 2009.

a. The Focus of Multilateral Defense Diplomacy

There are 270 documents that has been produced and found in which shown the
strategic orientation of Southeast Asia’s multilateral defense diplomacy, according to the
survey from University of Indonesia. These documents consist of presidency statements,
the form of declarations joint, action planning, annual reports and so on.
One of the instance case emerged from maritime domain, the issues of piracy,
illegal fishing, and across the border with no communication have coalesced with the rise
of demand for marine resources as well as energy. This case can be caused by an
unidentified border or historical animosities among regional states to fully evaporate and
contest its boundaries. As a consequence, regional states must to respond by empowering
the littoral security via the acquisition of maritime army guard like employed the aircraft
sea-control, boat, or offshore patrol vessels.

Climate strike and the changes of dynamic relation could possibly exacerbate a
line of conflict. The researchers have found that the climate strike leads to the
vulnerability to the transnational threats, such as piracy or well-organized perpetrator,
illicit trafficking, illegal migration, and so on.

One study examined that the vast majority of population in Indonesia, Malaysia,
Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia, and Singapore frankly expressed their support to a
democratic political system. Under these conditions, conventional security problem are
significantly rise to be likely a prominent foreign-policy agenda for those states due to
their respective population are pushing the governments to extremely pay attention
towards these sort of issues.

Consequently, despite of the changing strategic circumstances and frightening


democratization provide “push and pull” behind the increase of modern security issues,
the fact has shown if these cases are naturally transitional.

b. Trends in Multilateral Defense Diplomacy: The ASEAN Regional Forum


The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) can be called as a consultation institutions on
a broader range of security issues amongst Southeast Asian regions. In terms of regional
order, there are three significant rules or results that are worth it to be concerned.

Firstly, the ARF is categorized on the norms of behavior stemming in which


dwelled from “ASEAN Way” that focuses on establishing, noninterference, a peace
campaginer of disputes. Secondly, the ARF is only regional institution in worldwide that
is involved such a power state like USA, the European Union, India, and so on.

Nevertheless, despite of abundance of ARF’s agenda, it has allowed regional


countries to make some pathways to deal with a complex nexus between conventional and
sophisticated issues. For instance, in 2002, the ARF built an Intersessional assemble on
Counter-terrorism and Transnational Crime, which enhanced a multifaceted and beyond-
reaching plan that formed numerous practical proposals. Due to the rise of these meetings,
its regional states and partners are tribute to the concern with China’s rise. This is not a
splendid phenomenon where the plausibility of Southeast Asia falling ‘again’ into the
dominant orbit from China’s wealth.

c. Trends in Multilateral Defense Diplomacy: ASEAN

The establishment of APCS has led ASEAN Security Community Plan of Action
far-focused on relation in such different field of subject such as political development
(human rights, promotion, and so on), conflict prevention, forming and spreading the
norms (code which has conducted in South China Sea), military cooperation, and so on.

There are close to 50 ASEAN-initiated gathering between 2000-2010 that pointed


out the issues of defense diplomacy, particularly military forces of each member
countries. It is appear from the paper that, it has been a successful from the benefits on
building the ARF’s vary security discourses and applying them in ASEAN.

2.3 Southeast Asian Bilateral Defense Diplomacy: The Case of Indonesia

In Indonesia, the context of defense diplomacy implies the leading agency from
Indonesian Defense Force (TNI) or the Ministry of Defense (MoD). The role of military
institution have been existed since the New Order era (1966-1998), where the defense
force dominated and involved in making the policy. However, in these days, the military
forces are no longer contributed to the foreign-policy decision, they only play a role as an
ad-hoc diplomats within bilateral and multilateral defense diplomacy.

According to some studies, Indonesia has been conducted approximately eighty-


eight defense diplomatic acts between 2003 and 2008, where mainly it were designed for
CBMs (58), followed by capability of defense enhancement (17), and developing the
industrial (13). Through these acts, Indonesia cooperate with 32 states where it consist of
both potential enemy and colleagues in security terms.

3. Conclusion

To sum up, it is apparent from the author aims which wanted to discuss the three
arguments, they are:

1. The article has provided a broad regional overview of the trends, issues, and
mechanisms of Southeast Asia’s defense diplomacy and unpacked their complexity.
2. The article has sought to examine the problem and trends in Southeast Asian defense
diplomacy and unpack their complexities.
3. The impact of China’s rise has attributed to the rise of ARF’s multilateral defense
diplomacy simultaneously.
REFERENCES

Capie, D. (2013). Structures, shocks and norm change: Explaining the late rise of Asia’s defence
diplomacy. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 35(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs35-1a

David Baldwin, 1997 in Joshua Praditya, Security in Indonesia , ( Depok: Nadi Pustaka, 2016), p.
3.

Gumay, R. N. S., Octavian, A., & Swastanto, Y. (2018). Defense Diplomacy Implementation: the
Synergy of Indonesia and Australia in Dealing With Illegal Immigrants in the Sea Border.
Jurnal Pertahanan & Bela Negara, 8(1), 63–92. https://doi.org/10.33172/jpbh.v8i1.278

Laksmana, E. A. (2012). Regional order by other means? examining the rise of defense
diplomacy in southeast Asia. Asian Security, 8(3), 251–270.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2012.723920

You might also like