New Geopolitical Field
We must keep an eye on the world\'s new political structure with the concurrent emergence of several government leaders of the new generation
.
In the next five years, we must keep an eye on the world\'s new political structure, with the concurrent emergence of several government leaders of the new generation, along with the increasing influence of technology on a country’s competitiveness.
We should understand that “new generation” is not always identical with being young, and that it could also be because a figure emerges and rises beyond the expectation of many circles, either because they were previously active only in the regions and were never part of the political elite at the national level. In Southeast Asia, President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo and Philippines President Rodrigo Duarte fall within this category. Even though the two are separate in terms of age, neither are officials who emerged from the center of government, but rather from the "outskirts".
Political leaders of the new generation generally make breakthroughs or take political decisions beyond the general norm (out of the box) and their actions have strategic impacts, both in the regions and on the world stage, depending on the actors. However, this can lead to new friction that did not exist previously between two countries or had not risen to the surface. Graham Allison at Harvard’s John F Kennedy School of Government calls it "Thucydides\'s trap" in his latest book, Destined for War (2017). Thucydides is an ancient Greek historian who observed the cause of the Peloponnesian War, which erupted between the Athenians and Spartans in 5 BC. In conclusion, if there is a newly emerging power (read: state) that is deemed threatening to an existing power (ruling power), conflict and violence will arise from those who feel that their hegemony is disrupted.
China, which is emerging as a new power in the world, is changing today’s geopolitics. The list of countries that are closely linked to it, politically and economically, is expanding, and on the other hand, the US is increasingly being abandoned and considered part of the past. President Xi Jinping declared in a speech in early 2018: "China, which positively encourages the joint development of One Belt, One Road (OBOR), has always been a builder of world peace, and a contributor to global development, and a guard of the international order ..." Consciously or not, the US\'s superpower status is now fading and Washington is caught in " Thucydides\'s trap ".
In other regions, Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, 32, with his aggressive acts within his own country and in his foreign policy is changing the map of the Middle East. The first visit of King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud to China and Russia in the history of their diplomatic relations (followed by large-scale trade and military contracts) is part of Saudi Arabia’s new policy, which has thus far been conservative and highly oriented to the United States. Saudi Arabia has long been uncomfortable with Iran because of its Shia teaching and its political influence in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon; now it is approaching Russia and China, which are known to be close to Iran.
Crown Prince Salman (known as MBS) has also frozen political and economic ties with Qatar, even though they both sit on the Gulf Cooperation Council. As a result, Qatari Emir Sheik Tamin al-Thani, 37, later established a close alliance with Iran and Turkey, which have strategic interests in the region; Qatar, which is one-third the size of West Java, has the world\'s third largest gas reserves after Russia and Iran. Qatar is also actively seeking new trade partners and political allies in accordance with its interests in the Gulf and beyond, such as Indonesia.
Like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, which used to be a traditional ally of the US, is now very active in the region under President Recep Erdogan and its policies are not always in line with the US. A popular saying in Saudi Arabia, "the enemy of my friend is my enemy ", is still relevant today, and shows how Erdogan has been highly active in the diplomacy of the Palestinian issue, hosting an Emergency Summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in response to the US decision to move its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Both Turkey and Iraq share similar problems with the Kurds.
Only domestic political and economic conditions can make Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey reduce their ambitious competition to influence the region, and unfortunately, the three countries have time bombs in their own countries. The Saudi Arabian Crown Prince’s reforms do attract the sympathy of the younger generation, but also makes traditionalist groups, deposed noblity and the Wahabis unhappy. In Iran, the large rallies sparked by economic dissatisfaction among the youth cannot be underestimated, and in Turkey, iron hands do not necessarily guarantee its safety from bombings and acts of terror. The failure of the Arab Spring (Spring Democracy) in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt shows that domestic dynamics can produce unexpected results and optimism for the emergence of democracy can be defeated by the pragmatic considerations of a new ruler.
Technology and power
Technological development has affected bargaining power in international politics. According to former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in his book World Order (2014), the first is nuclear weapon technology. The monopoly over the technology broke in 1949 when the Soviet Union finally tested its first nuclear bomb. Since then, the number of members of the "nuclear class" has increased, because the technology is either shared voluntarily, stolen or bought illegally. What is clear today is that England, France, Israel, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea, as well as Iran to a certain extent, possess nuclear weapon technology.
If North Korea did not have nuclear weapons, surely Kim Jong Un, 33, would not have leverage against the US like he does now. If Iran had not learned about the technology, the country would not be considered a frightening competitor by Saudi Arabia, which, despite its wealth, has no interest in nuclear weapon technology.
Second, according to Kissinger, is information technology (IT). He saw how the US presidential elections optimized IT after Obama\'s first campaign changed face-to-face engagements and the way the contest was run among internet experts in cyberspace. Marketing ideas is carried out by machines that are able to infiltrate the hearts and minds of individuals en masse, and the candidate’s function simply becomes that of fund-raising, rather than elaborating political issues.
IT has also changed the democratic process in many countries. If civil society groups want to pressure their government into becoming a democracy, the groups simply disseminate their demands and democratic messages digitally, and Western countries (including the US) will usually respond quickly with political support and funding for the "digital movements", such as what young people are doing now, whatever the motive behind the support.
However, do not forget, advanced technology has another, worrying, side. In his book The Rise of the Robots (2016), Martin Ford said that due to the impact of advanced technology, the public are feeling the impacts of six major issues. The first is that income growth become stagnant. Second, the decline in new job opportunities means that finding a job takes longer. Third, fresh graduates face increasing difficulty in finding jobs. All are caused by the emergence of increasingly sophisticated robot technology that are able to replace human labor with enhanced productivity and significant drop in costs, because robots never demand a raise!
According to Ford, workers in the US worked a total of 194 billion hours in 1998. Fifteen years later, the value of the work increased by 42 percent to US$3.5 trillion, but the hours worked remained 194 billion hours. It can be concluded that within a decade-and-a half, man-hours did not grow even though productivity rose, as a result of efficient and mass use of robots, despite the fact that the US population grew by 40 million and thousands of new jobs were created. The widespread use of robot technology has also made China into one of the most advanced manufacturing countries in the world.
However, something not mentioned by Kissinger that has strategic impact is the US’s shale gas technology in. With increasingly sophisticated technology that lowers production costs, the US has transformed from a net oil importer into an oil exporter. According to the Institute for Energy Research (IER, 2016), current US oil reserves are 3.5 times larger than Saudi Arabia\'s reserves, thanks to the shale gas. This is one of the reasons why President Trump dared to take the controversial decision to move its embassy without much consideration of the views of its allies in the Middle East.
The US is no longer burdened with the task of securing oil-rich regions as it had in the pre-shale gas era, when oil supplies from the Gulf were the main drivers of its economy. Their presence in the region today is due to old political commitments and simply to maintain balance, especially because of Iran. Meanwhile, the rulers in the Gulf are fully aware that the "oil card" can no longer be played to pressure the US, especially since oil prices tumbled from $112.7 per barrel in 2012 to only about $50 per barrel today, which has caused budget deficits.
Saudi Arabia is trying to shift its budget, 90 percent of which is from oil, to other sources it had never considered under the new geopolitical paradigm. Several weeks ago, for the first time in history, Saudi Arabia imposed a 5 percent value added tax on sales of all kinds and at the same time, raised domestic fuel prices (Kompas, 5/1). The implementation of the VAT will provide an income of $21 billion in 2018, significant enough to fill its budget deficits. Other Gulf countries will also start to apply VAT this year.
Indonesia\'s position
We in Indonesia must be clever in reading this new geopolitical map and be skillful in navigating the current era for our national interest. Bung Hatta, in front of the Working Body of the Central Indonesian National Committee (KNIP) on Sept. 2, 1948, delivered his famous speech, "Rowing between Two Reefs". He said: "Each of us must have sympathy for this or that group, but the nation’s struggle cannot be broken by siding with sympathy, but instead should always be based on the realitiet of the interests of the state..."
The phrase "interests of the state", which was voiced 70 years ago, is highly relevant in the present era, because we foster good relations and accept financial investments from any country in the name of the "interests of the state". Too, in the name of the "interests of the state", our free and active foreign policy means Indonesia can be close to many countries without fear of being labeled a lackey. In this region, only Indonesia, which has a population of 262 million and has great economic potential, can be a counterweight to China, but also a new economic partner to that country (Howard W French, 2017).
President Jokowi has given very clear directions to anyone who wants to invest in Indonesia. First, the technology to be brought into Indonesia must be environmentally friendly. Second, it should utilize as many local workers and national expertise as possible. Third, investors are obligated to train the Indonesian workforce so they can be skillful workers in their field. Fourth, the technology transfer must be realized within a certain period of time.
These requirements clearly protect the state’s interests and are far from personal and group interests. Therefore, it is deplorable that there are still those who view that our good economic relations with one or two new economic powers in the world are a threat, rather than an opportunity. Over the last three years, there have been many circles in In Indonesia who prefer to spread pessimistic and even cynical views against whatever course the government takes, often without any objective arguments.
Luhut B. Pandjaitan
In the social media era, the inaccurate information that is circulated is frequently seen as truth by its readers, and unfortunately, pessimism even arises from inaccurate data, even though many of the "now generation" do not understand the relevance between the threat of communism and Indonesia’s dark past. If we are willing and agree not to waste energy in fighting over insubstantial issues, the excess energy can surely be used to build a better Indonesia. This excess energy is badly needed because to overcome its underdeveloped state, it is not enough for Indonesia to leap like a frog, but must instead make quantum leaps. We must leap ahead.
Luhut B. Pandjaitan
Coordinating Maritime Affairs Minister
