Indonesian Geo-Economic and Blue economy

Introduction

The world is no longer needs land as the sources of live. Now we are seeking the resources outside the land, and we turn in to the sea. Sea contains so many natural resources that will fulfill the needs of the people around the world. There are so many natural resources in the sea such as the oil and gas, fishery, and many more.

Geo-economic is the study of spatial, cultural, and strategic aspects of resources, with the aim of gaining a sustainable competitive advantage. It is a continuation of the logic of geopolitics, applied to the era of globalization. Consequently the study is the most relevant in the context of larger strategic entities, such as nations and multinational enterprises, which constantly face global competitive issues. Geo-economics is an alternative multidisciplinary direction for the study of economics. [1]

Geo-economics is not mainly concerned of political and military but with the economic activities. The economic things are in the top priority of one nation. Without the secure economic condition, states would not be able to run the state live. How the cycle of the economic thing run when the economics of the states is broken?

In this paper the writer will elaborate more about the Indonesian perspective in the Geo-economic and Blue Economy, because the future of Indonesia supposes to be back to the sea. When we remember that the huge number of resources in our sea within the territory of Indonesia. Indonesia will metamorphic to a rich country when Indonesia is soon initiating the blue economy and the concept of geo-economy.

Imagine if Indonesia develops all the resources within the sea it would be also change the paradigm. The paradigm of Indonesian people that at the first time is very land-based paradigm, it would be changed into the sea. The people will aware of the resources in the sea, and it also it will change the government mental, to build a good infrastructure to assist the people mobility from the ship for the fisherman, building the dock, and many more. It also will paralyze the government to build a new road, to bring the haul to the nearest market. Not only the road or another infrastructure, but also the government will think about how to secure the natural resources within the Indonesian sea or the territory.

The government will also strengthen the military sector in order to secure the territory, especially in the sea part, because Indonesia is an archipelagic state and it has so many islands, sea that must be protected. It is a must territory to be protected, because if we don’t do that, our natural resources within the sea will be stolen by the thief. The thieves that we cannot case, we cannot capture because they have better ships meanwhile we do have old ships. This is the phenomenon that we face, and it should be changed. We cannot let it just like this.

This concept is very suitable for Indonesia. Land-based economic is also suitable for Indonesia because we remember that so many Indonesian are the farmers. But if we take a look the condition of our fields nowadays is very pathetic. Thousand acre of paddy field are turned into property industrial, in other words it changed into the houses, apartments, malls and many other things that related to the property business.

Indonesia in Geo-Economy and Blue Economy

Geo-economic is a continuation of the Geopolitics. Many expertises believed that how to solve the economic problem in Indonesia is through the Geo-economy. Geo-economy is how to solve the economic problem with seeing the potential that the state has from the eyes of the geographic condition. Indonesia is surrounded by the sea. It would be better if Indonesia as soon as possible to initiated the Geo-economy.

As an archipelagic state with 17.499 islands and the coastal line the long 104.000 kilometer or the longest number 2 in the world, the potential of the sea is very big. It’s predicted the economic potential in the sea which related to the natural resources and the maritime service, the value will reach US$ 1,2 trillion per years. The growth of the sea-based economic is very positive. The statistic data, in the 2013 economic sector in marine and the fishery grew up 7% rather than the growth of national economic which just 5,81%. “Now and in the future marine sector and fishery have a strategic role in strengthening the food resilience and keep pushing the Indonesian economic growth. It was proved since the industrialization of fishery had been initiated by the Indonesian Ministry of Marine and Fishery on 2011 the productivity was always raised” said Indonesian Minister of Marine and Fishery Mr. Sharif C Soetardjo.[2]

In his perspective, the potential of Indonesian marine and fishery is very huge. From the past, Indonesia was a highway for the international sea transportation traffic. It bonded the Asia continent, American West Coast, and the European countries. Indonesian see is the biggest marine mega biodiversity area with 8500 fish species, and 555 seaweed species, and 950 species of the coral reefs. 3 plate tectonics met in Indonesian sea, they are Eurasia plate, Indo-Australia plate and Pacific plate, and it is the condition of the molding of mineral resources, oil and gas in the land or sea.[3] If Indonesia can develop them well, and we believe that Indonesia would not be lived in the poor condition, but it turns to rich one.

Blue Economy

The initiating of the blue economy will strengthen the continuation of management of the marine potential. Blue economy approach will also push the management of the natural resources efficiently, through the advance of technology. With the blue economy approach we can solve our waste management problem, because it is zero waste. The good impacts are it would also open so many job fields for Indonesian people and it will turn Indonesia to the wealthy state.

To start the blue economy it needs the coordination between the stakeholders. And the support from the government, the private sectors, international and national bodies, academician, researcher and many more will help us to make the blue economy in Indonesia become better and better. Blue economic will be just a concept if there is no coordination between the government and people.

This is what Indonesia needs, to change the paradigm from the land-based to the marine based. It must be supported by all aspects in Indonesia. The effects of the blue economy will come along with the initiation of the blue economy. In the sector of security, Indonesia doesn’t have to afraid of it would be the scarcity of food, because we have so many, million ton of fishery, also we have very large natural resources from gas, oil and mineral. In order to secure that all what we have that based on constitution number 33 that  said land, water and every natural resources belongs to the state and it will be used for the prosperity of people, the government will think how to protect the natural resources for our people. And this is the impacts of the blue economy in the sector of maritime security.

The Impacts

State will strengthen the sea power in order to protect the border from the trespasser or the thieves that want to steal the natural resources from Indonesia discreetly. When the economics of a state growth fast, it will trigger the state to strengthen the military power in order to maintaining the security within the territory and also to prevent the threats which come from outside country.

Indonesian Navy is not very strong when compare to other navy in the South East Asia. Indonesia is a big archipelagic state but it is not balanced with the strong sea Armed Forces, which is in this context is Navy. At least we have more than 100 ships in order to protect our territory. But the fact what do have now? How many battle ships do we have? How old are they? Those are the questions that always we asking as the international student, because we considering that it is important to strengthen our navy.

Indonesia is still using the brown water navy. However the wide the Indonesian sea needs more than brown water navy. We need at least green water navy or more advance the blue water navy. When Indonesia has a good economic growth and it is always rise or at least constant, the writer strongly believe that Indonesia will strengthen the naval power. How Indonesia maintain the territory if Indonesia doesn't have strong naval power?

If the prediction that Indonesia will strengthen the naval power continually, than the effect will also not only for Indonesia, but it also will be felt by the neighboring states. The neighboring states such as Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand or even Australia, and China will also feel the differences. The behavior of the navy will change, and Indonesia can be the leader of the Navy in South East Asia.

The awareness of geo-economy and initiating the blue economy will bring Indonesia to become the emerging power in Asia. Strong navy will also make the diplomacy become stronger. When the diplomacy is strong then the impact is the bargaining position of Indonesia will also stronger. We will not be presumed as a weak state. Indonesia will be a strong state. We will know where is our position when we facing the disputes. For example the South China Sea dispute. We will deal with them (the disputes sides) and giving them the win-win solutions in solving the problem.

So many impacts that will be felt after the awareness of the geo-economy and initiation of blue economy could bring Indonesia to the top of glory. But it still takes time in order to reach it. The paradigm of brown water navy supposed we change to green water navy. It will take at least 15 years to do that. Slow but sure! Even we move slow, but if we have plan to bring Indonesia to better future and the coordination between the people and the government become more solid, the future of Indonesian glory would not be just a dream.

Again if we have strong naval power, we can also control the sea and we can control the trade. The trade traffic would also bring us advantages because so many trades will be passing through in Indonesian water. This would be the busiest traffic sea in the world. Because our naval is strong, so we don’t have to afraid of the threats such as the piracy, because the thugs and pirates will have to think more than twice when they are dealing with Indonesian Navy.

Conclusion

The paradigm of Indonesian should be changed. How do we change the paradigm that already planted by years? Our ancestor was a sailor, but over time it changed. It was not also the wrong role that our ancestor was also a farmer, but we have to see widely Indonesia not just a pinch of land that we can live just from the land. We have to seek other sources where we can use them. As a state we cannot stuck to just do what is already become our habit, this is how we think outside the habit.

Using the paradigm of geo-economy that we have to seek other resources in order to enhance our economic by seeking or see to our geographical advantages. Indonesia consists of land and more sea, that’s why we have to use the sea as the main agenda to increasing our economy.

If we already started the sea-based economic or we can say it as blue economy, we will slowly take us to our benefit. Indonesia is rich of the natural resources within the sea, and not only the fishery but also the natural resources. If our economic is based on the sea, then the paradigm of our people will change. There will be so many fishermen, the economic condition for the people in the coast will develop and it will also trigger the government to rebuild the infrastructure. For example the road, in order to bring the haul to the city, they need the access of the good road. It also will give impact for the spread of the citizens. They will not always stay in Java Island, because when they realize there is another opportunity outside the Java Island, they will move and find another place to stay. The cycle of economy will run, and Indonesia will get the benefits which is in other words is lot of revenue or money. The money we can use for the establishing a school, public health, public transportation and many more. But the important thing is also for the strengthening the naval power.

Indonesian naval power should be given more attention. How Indonesian Navy guard the territory of Indonesia if the our naval is still weak? The increasing of economic will also being followed by the strengthening of the military power, and in this case the naval power would be the main concern of the government of Indonesia.

In order to avoid the stealing of natural resources and as the preemptive strike if the war happen the naval power is very useful for those kind of thing. If Indonesia has the strong navy, then the bargaining position of Indonesia will also increase, because the function of navy is also as the tool for the diplomacy. Our diplomacy will be assisted by the navy. But what we have now? Our navy is not strong, we still using the brown water navy. We have to change the brown water navy to the green water navy. In order to guard our territory from Sabang until Marauke, from Rote until Miangas, we must strengthen our naval power. Our navy is strong and the we will be the strong archipelagic state with good economic condition and also strong military power.

If we already secured our economy, any problem that we have within the country will be easily solved. It will be easy to solve any dispute with prosper people rather than we negotiate with the poor people, because psychologically the needs of the people haven’t fulfilled, so it could trigger the dispute between people.

Economic is the base of everything. When the economic condition is stable, the government can guarantee the welfare of the people, and then we can establish the order aspects such as the political, social, education and many more.

This paper shows us the greatest Indonesian treasure within the water area in Indonesia. This is just how we initiate the economic which is sea-based economic. The concept of geo-economic is already there and what we have to do is plan it, and do it. There is still hope that Indonesia will be strong. Indonesia can lead the ASEAN, Indonesia can also lead the Asia, as the greatest archipelagic state, we should move to the blue economic and slowly but sure, we will get all the benefits from the blue economic.

---

[1] Soilen, Klaus Solberg (Geoeconomic)

[2] http://www.antaranews.com/berita/399149/laut-masa-depan-indonesia

[3] Ibid

The Nuremberg Trials

The Nuremberg Trials (The Pro and Contra in the Aspect of International Law)

By: Andi Ibrahim Ali

Background

The Nuremberg Trials were a series of military tribunals that took place in Nuremberg from 1945-1949. This tribunals were about to prosecute the prominent figures from defeated Nazi regime. The initiators were the United States of America, United Kingdom, France and the Soviet Union. In 1943 the idea to bring the Germany to the International Military Tribunal to prosecute in charges of the war crime, crime against peace, conspiracy, and crime against humanity. The key defendants included Hermann Goering, Martin Bornmann, Rudolph Hess, and Joachim von Ribbentrop were there and of course they ascertained to get the punishment as the charges.

Even the Nuremberg trial was already passed; the pro and the contra still make this tribunal a hot debate. The unclear law basis, the idealistic and the realistic describe about the tribunal should be ran or not.

In the first trial, 22 of the most senior Nazi leaders face prosecution. Twelve of them were sentenced to death, seven others received long prison sentences and another three were acquitted. This trial was followed by twelve further trials of 177 people altogether, of whom 24 were sentenced to death.  

The writers here are gonna help the readers to open mind about the Nuremberg Trial. The writers will show how the paths before the trial was held in Nuremberg, from years to years until the trial officially started. About the debate between the pro and the contra in arguing the trial, and which theories are actually becoming the basis of the debate.

Timeline

Jan, 13. 1943          : International Trial to prosecute the criminal under Nazi.

Oct, 30. 1943          : Moscow Declaration (2 types of Criminals)

a.     Commit Crime in one sole location

b.     Commit crime in several different locations

Nov 28- Dec 2 1943 : Conference in Tehran (Iran). It was attended by President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill and USSR leader Stalin. The results of the conference were:

a.     Roosevelt : Executions after the trials

b.     Stalin       : Mass executions for the German Officers

c.     Churchill  : Rejected the mass executions but adherent to the      idea of summary

Feb, 4-11 1945      : Yalta Conference (Concerning the punishment of war criminals) President Truman rejected Churchill’s proposal (Summary executions)

May, 2 1945          : Robert Jackson was nominated as the chief prosecutor by President Truman, and officially he prepared the trial.

June, 5 1945          : Declaration of Defeat

a.     Assumption of complete authority by allied power to bring criminal without any delay.

b.     The Tribunal approaches had not agreed.

June, 20 1945        : American delegates negotiated with the British and the alliances (French and Soviet Union) about the number of trial and content of the bill of indictment. The American delegation preferred a trial centred on the “Nazi conspiracy”, meaning that the accent would be on the crime of aggression with a limited number of defendants and with limited, but decisive proof, as well as on the indictment of certain organizations. The British wanted a quick trial to be concluded in less than two weeks.

                             Negotiations with the French and Soviet delegations proved to be more complicated. The USSR immediately expressed its disagreement over the procedure and the nature of the crimes. The French, just like the Soviets, wished to put the accent on war crimes and the suffering endured by the people, and not on the “crime against peace” as put forward by the Americans.

Aug, 2 1945           : American proposition accepted by Stalin in Potsdam Conference. The indictment was about the aggression of Nazi.

Aug, 8 1945           : All the alliances parties United States of America, British, France and Soviet Union signed London Agreement (Nuremberg Charter) as the charter of international military tribunal.

Oct, 18 1945          : The trials were held in Nuremberg as the refusal of USA to hold the trial in the city of ex occupied by Soviet Union. [1]

The Pro and the Contra

Many debates came from this trials because even the international law scholars. They thought about the Nazi punishment supposed to be not there and another said vice versa. The writers will elaborate more about the contra first. What was the argument about the contradictive thought.

The Contra

The contra about the IMT Nuremberg was based on the Legal Positivism theory. Legal positivists make some distinctive claims about what constitutes legal validity. It is difficult to improve on the following introduction offered by Leslie Green: "Whether a society has a legal system depends on the presence of certain structures of governance, not on the extent to which it satisfies ideals of justice, democracy, or the rule of law. What laws are in force in that system depends on what social standards its officials recognize as authoritative; for example, legislative enactments, judicial decisions, or social customs. The fact that a policy would be just, wise, efficient, or prudent is never sufficient reason for thinking that it is actually the law, and the fact that it is unjust, unwise, inefficient or imprudent is never sufficient reason for doubting it. According to positivism, law is a matter of what has been posited (ordered, decided, practiced, tolerated, etc); as we might say in a more modern idiom, positivism is the view that law is a social construction.[2]

Based on John Austin on legal positivism that he claims the existence of law depends on its sources and not on its merits. It merely states that the existence of law may not depend on morality.[3] It is clear the legal positivism disagree with the IMT Nuremberg. Another explanation came from Prof. Dr. Muladi S.H that wrote in Peradilan Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Konteks Nasional dan Internasional because of the crime already committed before the Nuremberg Charter being compiled, and then it made a big debate as based on the “ex post facto criminalization.” The ex post facto law also called rectroactive law, in the writers language that means the law that could change the law consequences, because the law was made based on the issues that happened before. In the other words and in the linkages with the legal positivism, the ex post facto law could “violate” the criminal law. Moreover it raised a comment from one of the defendants Joachim von Ribbentrop that said “you’ll see. A few years from now the lawyers of the world will condemn this trial. You cannot have a trial without the law.” (Gilbert, 1995 p.36). U.S. federal judge, Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr. in “Nuremberg: A Fair Trial?,” argues against the trials based on a concept of justice predicated upon an assertion that, despite the immoral acts committed by the defendants, the trials did not cohere with established legal principles, such as ex post facto principles. The debate in the contradictive perspective of the trial was because it supposed no based law on the Nuremberg Trials. The legal positivism empirically sees it like this.

The Pro  

In “Opening Address for the U.S., Nuremberg Trials,” Robert H. Jackson, chief prosecutor for the United States at the Nuremberg Trials, argued for the validity of the trials based on a concept of justice predicated upon an assertion of an absolute right and wrong. Jackson argued against the claims that the charges against the defendants were illegitimate ex post facto laws. He also argued Germany participated in international conventions which “prescribed certain restraints as to the treatment of belligerents” and “certain immunities for civilian populations” occupied by a foreign army. It was not true that the Charter was new law, not authoritatively declared at the time; the acts were committed and unknown to the defendants. The Charter created for the trials was based on such international conventions.[4]

From the explanations above from the Chief of prosecutor at the trials, we can see the based theory was the Natural Law. Natural law (God’s Law) is a law or body of laws that derives from nature and is believed to be binding upon human actions apart from or in conjunction with laws established by human authority.[5] Natural law links to the moral, the intrinsic morality of law. Many scholars such Aquinas speak of law requiring adherence to morality. Laws which are contrary to morality are illegitimate. Immoral actions require punishment under the law. An immoral action protected by law is not justice. Morality is law. Law is necessarily moral and justice is adherence to morality.

Another debate that agreed with the trials was come from the Hague convention and 1928 Kellog-Briand Pact in the based on crimes against peace. Besides that, it was said that if the prohibition of criminal in retroactive way based on justness, then it would be more unjust when the Nazi’s criminals were not being punished.

Conclusion

The pro and contra in the Nuremberg trial was just like a drama in the global political game. The alliances got the victory against the Nazi. Even many scholars still think that it was victor’s justice[6] but imagine if the Nuremberg trial was not initiated. The condition of the world nowadays would be change through the different history also.

The point is; the pro and the contra came up with their own law theory. The contra was with the legal positivist and the pro side with the natural law theory. Jackson argued the Nuremberg trials would best serve justice based on a conception of justice involving the natural law theory. Wyzanski argued not having the trials would best serve justice based on a conception of justice involving legal positivism. Under natural law theory, ex post facto principles could be violated, leading to infringement on liberty. However, while legal positivism preserves ex post facto principles, it could allow harmful acts to go unpunished or allow for an unacceptable alternate system of justice. It seems either option could lead to an injustice.

It should be admitted that whatever the argumentations about the Nuremberg Trial, it had created the precedents which could penetrate the principle of legality which is very useful for the next era in the applying the international criminal law (Kittichaisarre, 2001).

Work Cite

http://www.trial-ch.org/en/resources/tribunals/international-military-tribunals/tribunal-militaire-international-de-nuremberg/creation.html

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/

http://www.lawteacher.net/jurisprudence/essays/legal-positivism-of-law.php

http://www.roberthjackson.org/the-man/speeches-articles/speeches/speeches-by-robert-h-jackson/opening-statement-before-the-international-military-tribunal/

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/natural+law

Austin, John. “Legal Positivism.” Adams, David M. Philosophical Problems in the Law. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012.

Jackson, Robert H. “Opening Address for the U.S., Nuremberg Trials.” Adams, David M. Philosophical Problems in the Law. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012.

Kittichaisaree, Kriangsak, International Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, 2001

Muladi, Demokratisasi, HAM, dan Reformasi Hukum di Indonesia, The Habibie

Center,2002

 Wyzanski, Jr., Charles E. “Nuremberg: A Fair Trial?” Adams, David M. Philosophical Problems in the Law. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012.

---

[1] http://www.trial-ch.org/en/resources/tribunals/international-military-tribunals/tribunal-militaire-international-de-nuremberg/creation.html

[2] http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/

[3] http://www.lawteacher.net/jurisprudence/essays/legal-positivism-of-law.php

[4] http://www.roberthjackson.org/the-man/speeches-articles/speeches/speeches-by-robert-h-jackson/opening-statement-before-the-international-military-tribunal/

[5] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/natural+law

[6] Victor’s justice: justice by the own basis of applying different rules to judge the wrong and right for their own forces and for their former enemy.