Indonesian Defense Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu (second left) talks with Philippine Defense Minister Delvin N Lorenzana and Indonesian Ambassador to the Philippines Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Johny Lumintang (second right) at the Colonel Jesus Villamor Air Base in Manila on Tuesday (6/6). At the meeting, Ryamizard expressed the support of Indonesia and ASEAN countries of the Philippine government’s efforts to overthrow the Islamic State (IS) group in Marawi, Mindanao, southern Philippines. At the same time, Ryamizard offered counter-guerilla training assistance to the Philippine military.
During the Shangri-La Dialogue from June 2-4, many participating countries were focused on the trilateral cooperation between Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. This is understandable, considering the actual threats the region is facing and the background to ASEAN’s security architecture.
The new millennium has seen the Asia-Pacific emerge as a new economic power. According to 1990 data from Oxford Economics research agency at Oxford University, the UK, Asia controlled 23.2 percent of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP). In 2014, this figure increased to 38.8 percent, higher than that of the US and the Europe Union (EU). In 2025, it is estimated that Asia will control 45 percent. This Asian economic resurgence is highly influenced by China’s economic boom.
Increased economic activities relates directly with increased security risks.
China’s resurgence also affected a reorientation in the US during Barack Obama’s presidency, when he announced a “rebalancing” policy of the US presence in the Asia-Pacific. Trump’s election made many Asia-Pacific countries worried, a worry which was addressed in an optimistic speech by US Secretary of Defense James Mattis at the Shangri-La Dialogue.
“As Vice President Pence [US VP Mike Pence] said in his visit to South Korea, Japan, Indonesia and Australia, we show that the US’s commitment to security and welfare in this region is still intact,” Mattis said.
The Asia-Pacific has its own uniqueness, as after World War II, a majority of countries in the region – such as Japan and Australia – were dependent on the US for defense matters. The Cold War made South Korea a US ally in East Asia.
ASEAN, established in 1967, has never emerged as a defense pact like NATO in Europe. As it currently stands, the presence of several ASEAN countries affiliated to China and the US has made an ASEAN defense unity impossible to realize, especially with the growing tensions in the South China Sea.
The ASEAN security architecture is dominated by the interests of large nations. However, several ASEAN countries have been successful in establishing trilateral cooperations, such as the Coordinated Patrol in the Malacca Strait and the maritime cooperation in Thailand’s southern seas.
Nevertheless, regardless of perceived traditional threats, be it in the South China Sea or on the Korean Peninsula, there is now the non-traditional threat of the Islamic State (IS) in Southeast Asia.
In reference to Mattis’ statement emphasizing ASEAN’s centrality in resolving terrorism issues in Southeast Asia, Indonesia has the opportunity to take on the most important role as ASEAN’s largest country and the world’s most populous Muslim nation.
It is no wonder that almost all foreign defense ministers who met with Indonesian Defense Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu asked about Indonesia’s plans to resolve domestic radicalism and terrorism, especially following the attack of the IS-affiliated Maute group in Marawi, southern Philippines. A trilateral cooperation in the Sulu Sea was the main focus.
“We need to make something for ASEAN security. A trilateral Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines cooperation is our proactive effort,” said Malaysian Defense Minister YB Dato’ Seri Hishammuddin Tun Husein.
National defense
It is for this purpose that the Defense Minister held the National Defense program to reinforce nationalism as a deterrent against foreign ideologies. To resolve the IS terror attack in Marawi, Ryamizard underlined the importance of regional cooperation, including intelligence information exchanges and trilateral cooperations.
“It is time for us to realize such cooperation plans. No more empty discourses. If necessary, we will ask Singapore and Thailand to join in,” Ryamizard said.
Terrorism is an international crime. No one country can face it alone. However, the actual structure of such international cooperation must be formulated in deeper ways.
In the context of the terrorism threats in Marawi, the trilateral cooperation is in the form of a coordinated patrol between Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines that will be realized on June 19.
The geography of Southeast Asia, comprising several archipelagic countries, is a unique feature. In the southern Philippines, there is the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG), which is known for maritime piracy and for taking ships and their crew hostage for ransom.
A report from the Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict (IPAC) titled “Pro-ISIS Groups in Mindanao and Their Links to Indonesia and Malaysia”, published on October 25, 2016, stated that, apart from the Maute group in Marawi, there was also a group from ASG’s Basilan faction, the Ansarul Khilafah Philippines, and the Bangsa Moro Islamic Freedom Fighters, all based in Mindanao.
Sea blockade
It must be noted that the guerilla fighters live on islands while the coordinated patrols are limited to a country’s marine area.
However, learning from Sri Lanka’s operation against insurgents, a sea blockade is extremely important, especially if it is conducted strategically. In Sri Lanka, the government’s effort in implementing sea blockades was important to fight against complete control of the seas by the Tamil Tigers. The Sri Lankan Navy contributed to foiling attempts to smuggle weapons and people, as well as sea piracy. This strategy effectively cut off the supply of weaponry and funding support for terrorist groups.
The problem is that a trilateral cooperationis very difficult to coordinate. There are gaps between the military cultures of participating countries. Apart from that, military powers that used to engage in conflicts with one another over border issues are now being forced to work together. This complicates existing technical problems, including communication protocols and the capabilities of weapons defense systems.
We have yet to discuss each country’s domestic issues, including the astronomical budget for maritime patrols. Indonesia’s involvement can also awaken the resentment of IS sleeper cells across the country, thereby expanding the battlefield. This is made worse by the fact that wars these days are fought in the real world and online.
From a variety of perspectives, full support and caution must be given to the implementation of this trilateral agreement. Its implementation is an important gamble for domestic and regional security, and for Indonesia’s global bargaining position.
