Regional Maritime Cooperation in Maintaining Maritime Security and Stability: A Test Case for ASEAN Unity and Centrality Angel Damayanti Christian University of Indonesia, Indonesia Abstract Southeast and East Asian regions have emerged as global strategic waters. Yet, the seas in the regions remain vulnerable with overlapping claims on sea borders, piracy attacks, and other transnational challenges at sea. For these purposes, some major powers in the region, such as the U.S., China, and Indonesia, have launched their respective strategies in securing the maritime areas for their interests. To harmonize these various interests, ASEAN with its counterparts in the East Asian region needs an ASEAN- led, inclusive, and comprehensive regional maritime mechanism and strategic partnership between ASEAN member states and its dialogue partners to maintain good order at sea. In November 2015, the East Asian Summit eventually launched a joint Statement on Enhancing Regional Maritime Cooperation to justify the centrality of ASEAN and to counter the failure of ASEAN Defence Minister Meeting. In such case, ASEAN member states need to manage their disunity to minimize hindrances of the realization and implementation of the plan. This paper mainly elaborates the reasons why the region needs regional maritime cooperation and discusses challenges that ASEAN has to deal with in order to implement the ASEAN unity and centrality in promoting maritime cooperation and regional stability. To explain the maritime strategies of ASEAN and its dialogue partners, this study uses qualitative methods and utilizes states’ documents as well as ASEAN statements particularly on maritime issues. Key words: ASEAN, maritime security, maritime cooperation, regional stability Journal of ASEAN Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2 (2017), pp. 119-134 DOI: 10.21512/jas.v5i2.1888 ©2017 by CBDS Bina Nusantara University and Indonesian Association for International Relations ISSN 2338-1361 print / ISSN 2338-1353 electronic 120 Regional Maritime Cooperation in Maintaining Maritime Security and Stability Introduction Globalization depends on the free trade system that relies on the secure and free flow of goods on sea-based shipping. The seas are therefore essential and become symbol of globalization for goods to be distributed, sold, and consumed worldwide. Moreover, international shipping underpins the prospect of further beneficial growth in economic and world trade. But to have that effect, it needs to be predictable, traceable, compliant with detailed pick and delivery schedules, stable, and secure (Till, 2009). Having said that, the emergence of Southeast and East Asian regions as the strategic center of maritime transport is also associated with an increasing numbers of both traditional and non- traditional threats, which particularly happen at sea (Prabhakar, 2006). For this reason, some countries in the regions, such as China and Indonesia, have published their respective initiatives to secure and maintain the stability of their sea territories. This is in addition to U.S. Rebalancing Strategy in Asia-Pacific launched in 2011, which is mainly aimed to secure the U.S. access in passing through the Strait of Malacca and South China Sea (Bradford, 2011; The White House, 2011; U.S. DoD, 2012). To respond the U.S. strategy, in September 2013 Chinese President Xi Jinping initially introduced the Silk Road Economic Belt concept, followed by the initiative to build a close and strategic cooperation between China and ASEAN Community, particularly in maritime cooperation (Xi, 2014). This is important as China proposes the construction of a 21st Century Maritime Silk Road to promote regional interconnectivity and economic integration (Xinhua, 2015). A year later, in front of ten ASEAN member states and its counterparts – namely China, the U.S., Japan, India, South Korea, and Australia – Indonesian President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) launched the idea of making Indonesia as the Global Maritime Fulcrum. Jokowi’s doctrine is mainly derived from the idea that the geo- economic and geo-political world is shifting from the West to the East and with the strategic position of Indonesia, the role of Indonesian seas will be important (Widodo, 2015). To harmonize the abovementioned strategic maritime policies, this paper accordingly supports an ASEAN-led, inclusive and comprehensive maritime cooperation between ASEAN member states with its counterparts, mainly the U.S. and China, that has been initiated in November 2015 East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. “Inclusive” means that this partnership should be open and give opportunities to all states in Southeast and East Asian regions to become strategic partners and enjoy mutual benefit in all seas and oceans in the region. Whereas, “comprehensive” means that this maritime cooperation aims to resolve traditional threats related to sea management as well as to counter non- traditional challenges that mainly happen at sea, such as transnational organized crimes and natural disaster. Such cooperative mechanism is vital as Southeast and East Asian countries mainly have common concerns to protect their seas and to enjoy benefits from them without harming other states’ interests. Therefore, this paper also elaborates the role of ASEAN, as the institution has become a primary driving force that is responsible to maintain peace, prosperity, security, and stability, particularly in Southeast and East Asian Journal of ASEAN Studies 121 regions. However, the disunity amongst ASEAN member states – as has happened in ASEAN summit in Phnom Penh, July 2012 due to the issue of South China Sea management and due to China’s economic and military support towards some ASEAN members on one hand and the U.S. support on the other hand – is likely to hamper the initiative and the implementation of such maritime cooperation. Therefore, ASEAN needs to initially enhance the unity amongst its member states by fostering cooperation through regional mechanism and ensuring that cooperation on bilateral basis does no harm to other member states. To deeply understand the issues, this paper conducts qualitative methodology, particularly the case study approach, as it allows us to see certain phenomenon not in a single event but always linked to other phenomenon. The method often involves interaction effects among many structural and agent-based variables, path dependencies, and strategic interaction among large numbers of actors across multiple levels of analysis with private information and strong incentives to bluff or deceive other actors. (Bennet & Elman, 2006-2007; Mahoney & Goertz, 2006). Therefore, to understand the logic behind certain maritime strategy of several states, this paper utilizes their white papers, their leaders’ speech, as well as other policies and analyzes their behaviors from those materials. This paper is divided into four parts: introduction, the significances of regional maritime cooperation, the role of ASEAN and how the association unites its member states, and eventually conclusion with recommendations. The Significances of Regional Maritime Cooperation W. Lawrence S. Prabhakar (2006) confirms in his article “Maritime Strategic Trends in the Asia-Pacific: Issues and Challenges” that the Asia-Pacific region is a globalized maritime environment. His idea implies that in the last decades Asia- Pacific region has emerged as a global strategic maritime area. Nevertheless, the region and its seas are also vulnerable from both traditional and non-traditional threats. This part accordingly explains at least three notions to confirm the significance of the region and its maritime area that accordingly calls the Southeast and East Asian states for an open and comprehensive collaboration on maritime management. First, the Asia-Pacific waters, covering the western part of Pacific Ocean specifically Strait of Malacca as well as the East and South China Sea, have an abundant inventory of natural resources that is surely advantageous for the island countries. However, this situation is also vulnerable at the same time as a significant number of transnational organized crimes happen in the region, particularly at sea. Second, the need to protect the maritime resources and the sea lines of communication (SLOCs) in the Indo-Pacific Ocean, along with the increase of national economic prosperity, has encouraged some states to modernize their navies. However, this situation in turn provokes security dilemma1 and 1 Charles W. Kegley and E. Wittkopf in their book World Politics Trend and Transformation (2001) define security dilemma as “the central problem faced by all sovereign states in an anarchic global system in which a state’s arming for ostensibly defensive purposes provokes other states to arm in response, with the result that the national security of all 122 Regional Maritime Cooperation in Maintaining Maritime Security and Stability creates instability in the region. Eventually, there are common concerns amongst Asia-Pacific states on their national economic development as well as regional and global stability and security maintenance materialized in their maritime strategic policies. Accordingly, Asia-Pacific states need a joint mechanism to arrange and harmonize their interests. With regards to the abundance of oil and gas in South China Sea, there are some assumptions and estimation on the numbers of undiscovered oil and gas resources, confirming the richness of western part of Pacific Ocean. In 2010, for example, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated that the South China Sea might contain anywhere between 5 and 22 billion barrels of oil and between 70 and 290 trillion cubic feet of gas. The Chinese National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC) was more optimistic to estimate the potential resources in South China Sea. Using their own research project, in November 2012, they estimated that the area held around 125 billion barrels of oil and 500 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Moreover, in 2013 the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) launched an estimation of approximately 11 billion barrels of oil reserves and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves in the area (U.S. EIA, 2013). In addition to oil and gas reserves under the sea, the abundance of fish and other marine resources in the South China Sea certainly benefits states that are located nearby the sea. In 2010, for example, China’s total aquatic production reached more than 60 million tons from its Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ). The declines as their armaments increase.” See also Robert Jervis (1976), Perception and Misperception in International Politics, Princeton University Press. production significantly increased from 7.5 million tons in 1999, and 47.5 million tons in 2004 (FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture, 2011). The number increases every year, as in 2015 Chinese fisheries production reached 65.2 million tons and more than 14 million tons aquatic plants captured from its maritime areas (FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture, 2017). From the table below, we can see the massive South and East China Sea marine production that benefits the Southeast and East Asian countries. With its EEZ covering the Strait of Malacca and the southern part of South China Sea, Indonesia gained more than 10 million tons of fisheries and more than 11 million tons of aquatic plants in 2015. This captures made Indonesia became the second biggest country enjoying the benefits from South China Sea fisheries resources after China. Vietnam also enjoyed the massive South China Sea marine production as it gained more than 6 million tons of fisheries, both captured and aquaculture fisheries. The Philippines gained nearly 3 million tons for fisheries and more than 1.5 million tons for aquatic plants, while Thailand gained nearly 3 million tons of fisheries. The massive production of South China Sea undoubtedly becomes an endowment for countries located nearby the waters. With a proper management, maritime countries will enjoy economic development from their waters. However, the abundance of marine production may trigger illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing and other transnational organized crimes threatening any island countries that lack control and are weak at protecting their waters and its marine resources. According to the Indonesian Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Indonesia Journal of ASEAN Studies 123 lost about US$23 million per year due to illegal fishing (Politik Indonesia, 2015). In order to protect its marine production and perform deterrence from illegal fishing vessels, the current Indonesian Ministry for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries under leadership of Minister Susi Pudjiastuti has firmly arrested more than 35 vessels with Chinese, Vietnamese, and Philippines flags by September 2015 (CNN Indonesia, 2014). However, this robust policy has become a concern for the Chinese, Vietnamese, and the Philippines governments and forced them to settle negotiation with the Indonesian government accordingly. Table 1. Southeast and East Asia Fisheries and Aquatic Plants Production, 2015 No Countries Fisheries (tons) Aquatic Plants (tons) Capture Aquaculture Total Capture Aquaculture Total 1 China 17,591,299 47,610,040 65,201,339 261,770 13,924,535 14,186,305 2 Japan 3,460,168 703,915 4,164,083 93,300 300,300 393,600 3 South Korea 1,648,993 479,360 2,128,353 7,826 1,197,129 1,204,955 4 North Korea 220,000 64,150 284,150 - 489,000 489,000 5 Indonesia 6,485,320 4,342,465 10,827,785 78,230 11,269,341 11,347,571 6 Malaysia 1,491,974 246,205 1,738,179 - 260,760 260,760 7 Philippines 2,151,502 781,798 2,933,300 367 1,566,361 1,566,728 8 Vietnam 2,757,314 3,438,378 6,195,692 11,822 11,822 9 Thailand 1,693,050 897,096 2,590,346 - 934,800 934,800 10 Singapore 1,645 4,971 6,616 - - - 11 Brunei 4,000 711 4,711 - - - 12 Myanmar 1,953,510 997,306 2,950,816 2,324 2,324 13 Cambodia 639,468 120,055 759,523 - - - Source: FAO (2017), World Fisheries and Aquaculture Production The second notion about the importance of Asia-Pacific maritime area is that the South China Sea and the Strait of Malacca are not only important for their marine outcomes, but also for their strategic position in connecting states and for its SLOCs. This is to confirm that the South China Sea, passing the Strait of Malacca, is significant for transportation and connectivity as well as trading system. Stretching from Singapore and the Strait of Malacca chokepoint in the southwest to the Strait of Taiwan in the northeast, the South China Sea is one of the most important energy trade routes in the world. The United Nations Conference 124 Regional Maritime Cooperation in Maintaining Maritime Security and Stability on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) confirmed that in 2013 approximately 30% of the world’s sea-based trading (UNCTAD, 2013) and nearly 60% of oil products and global liquefied natural gas (LNG) traveled from the Strait Hormuz and Strait of Malacca to South China Sea (U.S. EIA, 2013). The report from U.S. EIA (2013) also justified that more than 15 million barrels oil per day flowed from the Persian Gulf, through the Strait of Malacca and South China Sea, to East Asian countries as well as the U.S. In comparison, the world's most important chokepoint for maritime transit, the Strait of Hormuz between the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, had an oil flow of about 17 million barrels per day in 2011. The number of 15 million barrels per day significantly increased from the last two decades. In 1993, according to the Center for Naval Analysis, about 7 million barrels per day of oil and petroleum products, which was equivalent to 20% of world seaborne oil trade, passed through the Strait of Malacca. Moreover, the Strait of Malacca plays important role since it is the main entrance and the shortest sea route from the Persian Gulf to East Asia. However, the globalized maritime area not only endows states with increase in economic development, but also triggers transnational organized crimes, which mainly happen at sea. Thachuk and Tangredi (2002) define transnational organized crimes as crime activities perpetrated by non-state actors that not only go beyond national borders but also have global impact. They distinguish transnational crime perpetrators into two types of non-state actors, namely terrorist groups and organized criminal groups. With regards to terrorist groups, their activities nowadays are more intensely carried out, publicly targeted, and globally directed. They also use the same methods conducted by organized crime groups to finance their organizations, such as drugs trafficking, arms smuggling, money laundering, human trafficking, and piracy. In the case of maritime Asia- Pacific, terrorist attacks have become an issue since some Southeast Asian states have to deal with radical and terrorist groups, such as Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines. In relation to piracy threats, as reported by the International Chamber of Commerce’s International Maritime Bureau (ICC-IMB), there were 576 pirate attacks in the Strait of Malacca, Singaporean, Indonesian, and Malaysian coastal waters in 2004-2009 (ICC-IMB, 2004-2009), nearly 36% of all piracy attacks in all seas around the world. However, the ICC-IMB in 2011 reported that the number of piracy crimes in the Strait of Malacca, Singapore, Indonesian, and Malaysian coastal waters had dropped into 240 attacks in 2007-2010 (ICC-IMB, 2007-2009). This might have happened because the littoral states – Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore – had conducted joint patrols to protect the Strait of Malacca since July 2005. Despite the joint patrols, the piracy numbers increased into 631 incidents in 2010-2015 (ICC-IMB, 2010-2015). The increasing number of pirate attacks off the coast of Indonesia, Strait of Malacca, Malaysia, and Singapore Strait confirms the need of ASEAN littoral states to protect the security of their waters. To assure the free flow of goods and to safeguard the oil and petroleum supply, as well as to protect marine productions and sea territory, Asia-Pacific states continuously develop their naval power. Along with the increase of Journal of ASEAN Studies 125 economic prosperity, some states in the region are modernizing their military power and enhancing their military budget. As China’s 2015 Defense White Paper confirms that the threats for China’s maritime areas surely come from state and non-state actors, the Chinese government plans to gradually shift its People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)’s focus from “offshore waters defense” to the combination of “offshore waters defense” with “open seas protection”. As its economy has grown over the last decade, the Chinese authority allows PLAN to build a combined, multi-functional, and efficient marine combat force structure. This is to conclude that PLAN will enhance its capabilities for strategic deterrence and counterattack, maritime maneuvers, joint operations at sea, comprehensive defense, and comprehensive support. However, PLAN modernization and an increase in China’s military spending with the justification of its security and defense have provoked similar reaction from the unhappy, threatened neighbors. The lack of navies’ arrangement coupled with their naval capacities in the region has also become another concern, as there is no mechanism to supervise the naval power development of Asia-Pacific states. Regarding this, Rousseau argues that the weak position of one’s military power increases the perception of threat that leads to security dilemma and military competition (Ng, 2005). In turn, military competition, as noted by Stephen Walt (1987), may trigger military alliances as states’ response to threats and attempt to prevent stronger powers from dominating them. This situation accordingly intensifies the tension amongst Asia- Pacific states. This is true as in the case of Japan, Vietnam, and the Philippines that have conducted joint military exercises with the U.S. as they have problem with China in their overlapping claims on the East and South China Sea. Eventually, the importance of South China Sea and the Strait of Malacca for sea-based trading system and SLOCs as well as the increasing number of transnational crimes endangering the economic prosperity in Asia-Pacific states have become common concerns mainly for Asia-Pacific states. This is not to mention the instability in the region due to arms dynamic. Their common concerns are derived from the willingness to maintain their national economic development as well as regional security and stability. For this reason, major powers in Asia-Pacific and Southeast Asia such as the U.S., China, and Indonesia have launched their strategies either to safeguard their water territories and interests or to guarantee their access through the waters. In front of the Asia-Pacific leaders during East Asia Summit in November 2011, U.S. President Obama initially explained the U.S. rebalancing strategy in Asia-Pacific to secure and protect their vital interest in the region. To reflect his intention, the U.S. 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance justifies the U.S. military to continue their leadership in promoting stability and security regionally and globally by building stronger partnership with capable allies. According to U.S. authorities, the aim of this partnership is to reassure that the presence of U.S. military personnel and capability in the region is to maintain peace and stability collaboratively, as well as to safeguard the access and the use of global commons through seas. The partnership is not only of the U.S. interest, but also of Asia-Pacific states’ interests (U.S. DoD, 2012). 126 Regional Maritime Cooperation in Maintaining Maritime Security and Stability This strategy continues under the Trump administration. The U.S. remains focused on the growing importance of the region, particularly for its seas and the freedom of navigation operations. The American Defense Chief, Secretary Mattis outlines the U.S. effort to achieve a rebalance to the Asia Pacific region. Some of the efforts are to strengthen alliances, encourages strong and responsible partners and strengthen U.S military capabilities in the region. Those are in addition to less formal networked security cooperation or interconnected region, to include bilateral, trilateral and multilateral exchanges, exercises and arms transfers. (Cronin, 2017) As a response to the U.S. initiative in the maritime Asia-Pacific, which partly is also performed by joint military operations, China has launched its counter-balance strategy. Since Chinese government is still locked in sea border disputes with Japan and four of ASEAN members – Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, and Malaysia – Chinese President Xi Jinping firmly declared his disapproval of the involvement of external powers, mainly the U.S. In the 2014 Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), President Xi Jinping proposed a new “Asian Security Concept” which argues that Asian problems should be resolved by Asian people and that Asian security should be protected by Asian people: “