Indonesia’s swift securitization of the Natuna Islands how Jakarta countered China’s claims in the South China Sea

Meyer, Patrik K; Nurmandi, Achmad; Agustiyara, Agustiyara

doi:10.1080/02185377.2019.1590724

Cited by 25 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Scholars have used securitization theory to explain various cases of Indonesia's security policy, including the South China Sea disputes (Meyer, Nurmandi, & Agustiyara, 2019), the Aceh insurgency (Geri, 2018;Kurniawan, 2018), the Maluku conflict (Kurniawan, 2018), terrorism (Van Damme, 2008;Febrica, 2010), illicit drugs (Widiyono, 2018), migrants and refugees (Zayzda, Ash-Shafikh, & Kusuma, 2019), migrant workers (Arifianto, 2009), as well as online hoaxes (Lee, 2020). However, there is still a lack of literature on public health securitization in Indonesia, which this article seeks to fill the gap.…”

Section: Securitization (And Militarization) In Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Indonesian Government’s COVID-19 Measures, January–May 2020: Late Response and Public Health Securitization

Chairil

2021

JSP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Indonesian government’s measures to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic can be characterized by late response due to initial de-securitization of the issue, and later securitization that limits its very efficacy in restricting the spread of the pandemic. This article uses securitization theory to analyze the government’s measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic and discusses how the government’s increasing reliance on military figures and national security agencies influences the measures used to control the COVID-19 pandemic. This study finds that initially, the government seemed to be trying to de-securitize the issue, denying warnings that the virus might have existed undetected in Indonesia. Then, after the first cases were confirmed in March 2020, the government responded by securitizing the issue. The delay in the government’s response to COVID-19 caused the audience to not fully accept the government’s securitization efforts because public trust in the government’s measures was already low, while the means of emergency action taken by the government against the threat of COVID-19 are also limited. The government has also been overly reliant on influential military figures and national security agencies. The government also tended to downgrade the threats, lack transparency, and even use the pandemic to crack down on anti-government smears. This article concludes that the government needs to change their approach to COVID-19 measures and prioritize the human security dimension by not downgrading the threats and upholding transparency.

show abstract

Section: Securitization (And Militarization) In Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Indonesian Government’s COVID-19 Measures, January–May 2020: Late Response and Public Health Securitization

Chairil

2021

JSP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indonesia especially considers this issue as a serious encroachment by foreign vessels. Fishing vessels from China are involved in a territorial dispute between the two countries, as they are often found within the EEZ of Indonesia, part of which overlaps with the area within the nine-dash line claimed by China [53].…”

Section: Overview Of Fishery Status and Iuu Fishingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting Cooperation of Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance of IUU Fishing in the Asia-Pacific

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing is becoming a growing threat to sustainable fisheries and the economy worldwide. To solve this issue, various efforts on monitoring, control, and surveillance (MCS) have been made at the national, regional, and international levels. However, there is still the lack of measures against IUU fishing vessels at the multilateral level. Here, we assessed the situations of fisheries, and the current systems and challenges of MCS in eight Asia-Pacific countries with a focus on MCS of IUU fishing vessels at sea. Through a literature review and interviews, we confirmed that IUU fishing was linked with the status of fisheries in each country, and that each country implements various MCS measures with different emphases. However, there was a trend of enhancing or newly establishing four areas of MCS: vessel tracking, patrol, onboard observers, and port State measures, with amended or newly adopted laws. We also identified challenges of MCS such as insufficient MCS in coastal areas and fragmented cooperation among the countries. Based on our findings, we advance several recommendations including the enhancement of cooperation among stakeholders, especially fishers, for co-monitoring in coastal areas and the establishment of a communication platform for Asia-Pacific countries.

show abstract

“…In 2013-2014 Natuna was discussed by the central government in Jakarta only in economic, cultural and tourism aspects (Meyer, Nurmandi, & Agustiyara, 2019). The relations between Indonesia and China were considered to be still warm that year and the two countries agreed that the problem in Natuna waters was only the illegal fishing problem.…”

Section: Natuna's Position For Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The security perspective was related to the context of Indonesia's sovereignty and security. President Joko Widodo in 2015 instructed the Head of the National Planning Agency (BAPENAS), Andrinof Chaniago to study the Natuna to be a stronghold of the Indonesian military fortress or in other words make the Natuna the Pearl Harbor of Indonesia (Meyer et al, 2019).…”

Section: Natuna's Position For Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2016, the Natuna was fully reviewed by the Indonesian government as a security issue, this can be seen from several indications such as budget allocation for military installations in the region, efforts to increase 5,000-12,000 personnel to serve in the region and protest notes delivered to China. Furthermore, prioritizing incidents in the Natuna waters became a matter of national security (Meyer et al, 2019).…”

Section: Natuna's Position For Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constructivism Approach: Changes in Orientation of Indonesia in the North Natuna Sea to China's Claims

Wahyudi¹,

Luerdi²

2021

JIWP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses Indonesia’s orientation in the North Natuna Sea in the constructivism. The article aims to look at the change of Indonesia's orientation towards the positioning of North Natuna waters following China’s claims as the part of its territories. Indonesia’s orientation used to be for economic development activities. However, Indonesia then swifted such orientation to defense and security. The article applied the constructivist theory of Alexander Went. The article applied the qualitative approach whose data collection was through literature study.

show abstract

Indonesia’s swift securitization of the Natuna Islands how Jakarta countered China’s claims in the South China Sea

Cited by 25 publications

References 10 publications

Indonesian Government’s COVID-19 Measures, January–May 2020: Late Response and Public Health Securitization

Indonesian Government’s COVID-19 Measures, January–May 2020: Late Response and Public Health Securitization

Promoting Cooperation of Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance of IUU Fishing in the Asia-Pacific

Constructivism Approach: Changes in Orientation of Indonesia in the North Natuna Sea to China's Claims

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About