1

INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR MARITIME SECURITY :CURRENT SITUATION AND PROBLEMS
By
Prof. Dr. Hasjim Djalal,
Ambassador/Special Adviser to the Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries

Disputes in the Asia Pacific Region
Broadly speaking, there are plenty of disputes in the Asia Pacific region that, if
not well-managed, can develop into conflicts that may affect maritime security in the
area:
There are still some remnants of ideological and political conflicts in the area
between communism and capitalism, although the intensity of these conflicts is now
substantially diminished. North Korea, China and Vietnam are still “communist”
countries, although they are already practicing a substantial degree of “market” economy
in place of “planned” economy. The need for global economic, trade and investment
developments seems to have abated this conflict. Yet, a new “political” rivalries andequation seem to be emerging in the Asia Pacific region, particularly between the UnitedStates and China. This political “rivalries”, if not well-managed, could have the effects ofincreasing tension, particularly in the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan Straits, or even in theSouth China Sea, all of them could affect maritime security in the region.
There are also plenty of territorial and jurisdictional disputes in the region that, if
not well-managed could erupt into conflicts and perhaps armed conflagrations. There is adispute between Russia and Japan on the “Northern Islands”, between Japan and Korea
on the Tokdo/Tsushima Islands, between Japan, China and Taiwan on the
Diaoyutai/Senkaku Islands, between Vietnam and China on the Paracels, between China,
Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei on all or some of the Spratly
Islands, between Indonesia and Malaysia on the Sipadan and Ligitan Islands, between
Malaysia and Singapore on the Batuputih Rock, between Malaysia and the Philippines on
Sabah, between Cambodia, Vietnam and Thailand on some islands in the Gulf of Siam,etc. In addition, there are also plenty of land boundary disputes between them as well as
disputes over maritime zones, partly due to the different interpretations and applicationsof the provisions of the UNCLOS 1982. Most of these disputes are being managed
bilaterally through direct negotiations, and some of them are being settled. There are also
disputes that are being brought to the ICJ in The Hague, such as between Malaysia andIndonesia and between Malaysia and Singapore. In many cases the management of thesedisputes has been made more complicated by the traditional animosity and rivalries
between and among states in the region, although lately the habit of confrontation has
been somewhat overcome by the development of the habit of cooperation in the region.

2
Moreover, the enactment of national legislations to solidify and consolidate maritime
claims have not been helpful in seeking solution to the problems.
In addition to ideological, political, territorial, and jurisdictional disputes
mentioned above, there are also plenty of technical and practical issues in the region that
may affect maritime security. Some of them, as indicated above, deal with different
interpretation and application among states with regard to the provisions of the UNCLOS
1982. Those issues are not necessarily in the form of disputes or conflicts but could leadto them. In some cases the lack of ability of some states to deal with the problem or due
to lack of cooperative efforts among the states in the region, could also result in conflict.
Some of the issues have been the subject of various studies and discussions in the various
forums in the Asia Pacific region, formal and informal, such as in the ARF, ASEANChina Dialogue, APEC, CSCAP, South China Sea Workshops, and various otheracademic and think-tanks institutions.

Maritime Security Issues
There are plenty of issues in the Asia Pacific region, primarily illegal acts at sea,that could easily develop into disputes and conflicts, thus affecting maritime security inthe region. The CSCAP in its Memorandum No. 5 has enumerated some of those illegal
acts at sea, such as piracy, maritime terrorism, drug trafficking, human smuggling,
maritime theft and fraud/”phantom” ship, illegal fishing, and environmental offenses. The
Memorandum also indicated various measures that have been taken to deal with theseissues as well as the various Agreements and Conventions to manage them.
The South China Sea Workshop have also dealt with this issue since the last
several years. Within the context of promoting safety of navigation, shipping andcommunication in the South China Sea, a Group of Experts on Search and Rescue andIllegal Acts at Sea in the South China Sea, within the aegies of the South China Sea
Workshops process, has been convened in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia in June 1999. The
Group of Experts among others agreed to recommend the following:
•

•

•
•

To encourage participating authorities to strengthen the existing bilateral andmultilateral SAR arrangements in the region and to develop and implement new
arrangements with relevant authorities, particularly in the northern part of theSouth China Sea.
To urge participating authorities to become party to the relevant IMO
Conventions, particularly the 1979 International Convention on Maritime Searchand Rescue and the 1988 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts
Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.
To request the Fourth TWG on Legal Matters to study the relevant aspects of theASEAN SAR Agreements and the IMO SAR 1979 Convention, and the UNCLOS
1982, with a view to making a regional SAR arrangement.
To request each participants to submit to SCSIWG/Pusat Studi their national
contact points for SAR to be disseminated by these organizations with a view to

3

•
•
•

•

•
•

•

promoting information exchange and intensifying co-operation between
participants.
To encourage participating authorities to foster communication and co-operation
between and among national contact points.
To request the SCSWIG/Pusat Studi to collate and disseminate information on
national arrangements and agencies responsible for SAR and the suppression ofillegal acts against the safety of maritime navigation.
To encourage more intensive co-operation between the agencies of participating
authorities involved in SAR and the suppression of illegal acts against the safetyof maritime navigation, and their relevant counterpart agencies, including thepossibility of dialogue partnerships with police agencies in the South China Sea
region.
To encourage participating authorities to take measures to implement theprovisions of the UNCLOS 1982, regarding SAR and illegal acts at sea,particularly Article 98 on SAR; Article 100, 105, 107 and 110 on piracy; Article
108 on illicit trafficking in drugs; and Article 99 on the prohibition of thetransportation of slaves.
To encourage the participating authorities to identify clearly their enforcement
agencies at the local level for reporting acts of piracy and other illegal acts at sea,
with a view to expediting and facilitating measures against illegal acts at sea.
To recommend that the Fourth Meeting of the TWG on Legal Matters examine
the Draft Regional Agreement on Co-operation in Combating Acts of Piracy andArmed Robbery Against Ships, contained in Annex 5 of the Report of the IMO
Regional Seminar and Workshop on Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships,
held in Singapore in February 1999, and consider its relevance to the South China
Sea region.
To request that the SCSIWG/Pusat Studi obtain more information with regard toillegal acts at sea from the IMO and the International Maritime Bureau, to be
circulated to all participants.

The position taken by the Expert Group has been supported by the Fourth Meeting of
the Technical Working Group on Legal Matters in Koh Samui, Thailand, in September
1999 and endorsed by the Tenth Workshop of the South China Sea held in Bogor,
Indonesia in December 1999. The Workshop agreed to give priority to combating piracy
and armed robbery against ships, and enhancing SAR arrangements in the South China
Sea region. At the same time the Workshop emphasized the importance of hydrographic
data and information exchange for the safety of navigation in the South China Sea.
In fact, since the First Meeting of the TWG on Safety of Navigation, Shipping andCommunication in the South China Sea in Jakarta in October 1994, there was already anagreement that Singapore should lead the study on education and mariners, Malaysia on
unlawful activities and SAR, Chinese Taipei on exchange on hydrographic data on
information, and China on contingency plans for pollution control. Some progress havebeen made on these topics within the context of managing potential conflicts in the South
China Sea.

4
Despite some progress in dealing with the issues of illegal acts at sea, new problems
seem to be emerging in greater extent in the Asia Pacific region. The problems of humansmuggling by sea of refugees have been increasing significantly in recent years,
particularly as the result of the situation in South Asia and the Middle East. Illegal fishinghas also multiplied significantly, despite some efforts to deal with this matter in the West
and Central Pacific, particularly with regard to the implementation of the UNCLOS
provisions on High Sea Fisheries as well as the UN Implementing Agreement on
Conservation and Management of Straddling and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (1995) inthe region. Another issue that is emerging is the problem of ballast water and tankcleaning which can result in the discharge of oily sludge or even the introduction ofmarine pests. Due to the heavy traffic of oil tanker and other shipping in the Asia Pacificregion, these problems could become serious, particularly because they are difficult tomonitor and, so far, lack of cooperative arrangements between states in the region onthese matters.
There are other unresolved problems of the Law of the Sea that could affect maritime
security in the Asia Pacific region. One of them is the problem of innocent passage interritorial sea for warships and ships carrying nuclear weapons or nuclear or otherhazardous cargos, in the sense that whether the regime of prior notification or priorauthorization is applicable to them in this context. There are states in the Asia Pacificregion that require prior notification or prior authorization for those ships before they
exercise the right of innocence passage through the territorial sea. There are also statesthat do not agree with this condition. The UNCLOS 1982 is silent on this point. This
problem could become serious in the future in the Asia Pacific region.
There are also problems of navigation and over-flight on and above the EEZ. There
are at least four problems that could result in maritime security problems in the Asia
Pacific region, particularly in semi-enclosed seas which are practically enclosed by the
EEZ of the neighboring countries. Those problems are : (a) with regard to over-flight andair espionage by military aircraft, (b) the conduct of hydrographic survey and military
intelligence gathering while navigating the EEZ, (c) the conduct of military exercises inthe EEZ of other countries, and (d) the emplacement of detecting devises or othermilitary equipments on the continental shelf of other countries. While there are Asia
Pacific countries that require prior authorization for these purposes, there are alsocountries that would regard them within the general meaning of the freedom ofnavigation and over-flight guaranteed by UNCLOS 1982.

Indonesian Situation.
Indonesia is a large maritime and archipelagic state in the Asia Pacific region. It
controls about 3 million square km of archipelagic waters and territorial sea, plus another3 million square km of EEZ and Continental Shelf. It also controls several importantsealanes for the communications between the Pacific and the Indian Oceans. While these
extensive maritime zones offer enormous economic potentials for the development of the5country, they also bring with them enormous tasks of protecting them as well as inmaintaining law and order at sea and the national unity of the archipelagic country.
According to some studies, Indonesia requires more than 300 vessels, large andsmall, to protect its maritime space and resources, as well as plenty of port facilities,
human resources and technology for that purpose. So far it has only about 115 vessels,
and out of these there are only about 25 vessels that are operating at sea at a particular
moment. The current political, economic and financial crisis in Indonesia aggravated the
problem of law enforcement at sea as well as of maintaining maritime order to preventthe disintegration of Indonesia as a unitary and as an archipelagic state. Consequently,
there have been substantial slackening in the law enforcement and security at sea.
The major problem at the moment, however, are (a) to prevent armed robberies at
sea and to promote cooperation with the neighbouring countries to fight against armed
robbery and piracy, (b) to prevent illegal fishing by foreign vessels which are depleting
the resources of the Indonesian seas as well as depriving Indonesian government of its
legitimate income, (c) to protect and patrol Indonesian archipelagic sea lanes which are
so important for regional and global maritime and military strategy, especially in time ofregional and global crisis, (d) to prevent the use of Indonesian maritime zones for illegal
acts at sea, including for the purpose of illicit traffic in drugs, armed smuggling, maritime
terrorism, illegal human and refugees transit to third country, etc.
Indonesia would require enormous resources to protect its maritime zones. Yet, at
this moment it does not have enough of the financial resources. As an example,
Singapore, a country of about 700 km2, spent US$ 4.2 billions for military spending in1999 or roughly 24.9% of the total government spending at that time, while Indonesia, acountry of about 8.000.000 km2 of territory and maritime zones, spent only US$ 1.5
billion in 1999, or roughly 5.9% of the total government spending at that time. It is fully
aware that piracy and armed robberies have arisen significantly in 2000 in comparison
with 1999. Most of the armed robberies in 2000 in South East Asia occurred in theIndonesian waters, particularly in the archipelagic waters between Singapore and the Java
Sea, in the Malacca Straits, and in the South China Sea.
••

With regard to the western waters, particularly the approach to Singapore throughthe Karimata Straits, there has already been a plan to strengthen Indonesian law
enforcement capabilities in the area particularly by increasing surveillance andmonitoring system as well as response capabilities. The study indicated that it
would cost Indonesia about 38,5 million US$ for anti piracy command andcontrol center between Strait of Singapore and Jakarta. Unfortunately, Indonesia,
particularly at this moment, does not have the fund for that purpose, especiallysince now it is already accumulating billions of dollars in foreign debt.
With regard to the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, andSingapore have been cooperating to promote safety of navigation with the supportof Japan within the last 20 years. The cooperation have resulted in improved
navigational aids and hydrographic charts as well as other safety measures. The6•three coastal states, through bilateral mechanism, have also cooperated andcoordinated their patrol to deal with illegal acts at sea particularly armed robberies.
With regard to the South China Sea, Indonesia together with other littoral
authorities have taken the initiative to promote cooperation on safety ofnavigation, shipping and communication as indicated above.

It should be noted that article 43 of UNCLOS stipulates cooperation between
users states and states bordering a strait, (a) “in the establishment and maintenance ofnecessary navigational and safety aids or other improvements in aid of internationalnavigation, (b) for the prevention, reduction and control of pollution from ships”. So far
only Japan that has cooperated with the three coastal states with regard to installingnavigational aids, hydrographic survey, and other means to promote safety of navigation.
Yet, not much cooperation or assistance have been forthcoming from the user states toprevent, reduce, and control pollution from ships. Moreover, practically no help orcooperation is forthcoming from other users states to help the coastal states, particularly
Indonesia, to fight against piracy and armed robberies in the area, despite the fact thatthese measures could be regarded as “other improvements in aid of internationalnavigation”. In addition, although article 43 deals with the promotion of safety ofnavigation and control of pollution in straits used for international navigation, there is no
reason not to apply it to archipelagic seal-lanes as well if the archipelagic state concerned
so requires.
There is no doubt that Indonesia needs help to maintain law and order at sea andto protect its maritime resources and national unity. It is my understanding, however, thatIndonesia would not welcome the initiative of maritime countries to escort their vessels
by their Coastguards in navigating Indonesian waters. Neither Indonesia would welcome
the policy of the maritime powers to arm their commercial or cargo vessels as well astankers when navigating Indonesian waters. These acts could create problems andcomplications in the field rather than solution. On the other hand Indonesia would
welcome initiative from the user states as well as other stake holders to assist Indonesianlaw enforcement and security apparatus at sea to maintain and strengthen theircapabilities either through providing aids, equipments and trainings or on helping toorganize, coordinate cooperative efforts and linkages with other regional or otherinterested parties, as well as in intensifying training program for law enforcement andsecurity officers at sea.
It should be noted that the CSCAP (Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia
Pacific Region) in its Memorandum No. 5 has also identified some scope for regional
cooperation in combating illegal activities at sea, such as: (1) harmonizing maritime lawsof the states in the region, (2) encouraging flag states to discharge their responsibilities
with regard to vessels flying their flags, particularly in case of illegal fishing, drugs andarmed trafficking, offenses against marine environment and human smuggling, and (3)resolution of areas of uncertainty in the Law of the Sea, particularly on the definition of“piracy”, and on enforcement principles in the EEZ for offenses other than those related
to resources and the environment. The memorandum also indicated prospective
cooperative measures on bilateral level (boundary delimitation, border control
agreements, information exchange and coordination, reciprocal enforcement), and on

7
regional level (piracy, flag states responsibility, EEZ jurisdiction, training and education,
information and data exchange, harmonization of maritime laws, monitoring of ships
pollutions, and possibility of joint enforcement).

Conclusions
There are many issues and disputes in the Asia Pacific region that could develop
into maritime conflicts that would endanger maritime security, either of political andstrategic nature, or due to conflicting territorial and jurisdictional claims at sea, or due todifferent interpretation and application of existing rules of international law on specificsubject. There are also issues that may not be in dispute but due to lack of enforcement,
they may also create maritime security problems, such as illegal acts at sea drugtrafficking, human smuggling, etc
There are already plenty of international instruments and conventions as well as
bilateral and regional arrangements to deal with some of these issues. Various
international organizations and agencies are working to draft various legal instruments toclarify and regulate the issues. Again, the problem in many areas is basically the ability to
implement the agreements or conventions, especially due to the limited capacities andresources of many developing countries in the Asia Pacific region and the lack of actual
supports and assistances from the developed maritime countries.
Indonesia as a big maritime, archipelagic, developing country is fully aware of the
problems, at least some of them. Yet, due to its domestic political, economic andfinancial difficulties at this moment, it finds itself in difficulties to strengthen its law
enforcement and security apparatus not only on land but also at sea. Unless someassistance is forthcoming, it would be sometimes before Indonesia could devote sufficientamount of resources for the law enforcement and security at sea.

____________________________________
Paper Presented at the IIPS Meeting, Tokyo, 9-14 December 2001
C: maritime security