The Irony of Brotherhood in UK's Politics

Former UK Prime Minister, Winston Churcill once said, "I am never going to have anything more to do with politics or politicians. When this war is over, I shall convince myself entirely to writing and painting."

I imagine what will David Miliband do now, after his dreadful lost at UK's Labour Party leadership election last week. His younger brother, Ed Miliband defeated him after the elimination of Diane Abbott, Andy Burnham, and Ed Balls. Ed was ended with 50.65 percent of the vote, with David Miliband winning 49.35. This is clearly an unexpected result for many people, especially for those inside the Labour Party's establishment, including MP's (Member of Parliament), MEP's (Member of European Parliament), and the members. Ed Miliband evidently won the full supports from members of trade unions and other affiliated groups. He got three biggest unions backed him, while the other one (the small one) supported his brother.

Undoubtedly, David Miliband's political career will obtain serious impacts after this surprise. Confidently prepared everything for the contest which began since May 2010, and has become long favourite for the top job, David now seen as a "dissapointed brother" who will not stick around Ed's leadership at the party for long. At the stage on Sunday (September 26th), David congratulated his younger brother while also stated some political understanding common words like "I'm incredibly proud of my brother, he definetely has a huge amount to offer to our politics." He looks fine, at least.

Later on, at the same time, David told the reporters, "I dont know if you noticed but I came here on Saturday planning slightly different week. I am now thinking what I am going to do instead." So this is the question, what will David do after this remarkable weekend? The shadow foreign secretary believed by many people will not accept any position (if offered by his brother) at the party, even though some speculations enlarge inside British Politicians that Ed will give chancellor job to his older brother. But it still unclear, until this Tuesday, when the Party's conference will begin to announce the latest positions and jobs at the party under Ed Miliband as the chief.

This might be the most well known Labour Party's leadership race, remembering the two Miliband's brother took place as an opponent one to each other, this battle even more interesting to watch after 17 years of Tori's leadership at the 10 Downing Street, there hasn't been too much greatness inside the party for international people and additionally, Tony Blair's decision on Iraq war made it even worse. If we look back to 1920s-1930s when Ramsay Macdonald elected as the first Labour Party's prime minister, He told the world that his mission was clear: "To ensure the party was seen as capable governing and promoting world peace." He, then, failed spectacularly in both aims. And that what also Tori's showed to the world. 

Blair handed over power to finance minister Gordon Brown in 2007, and again, the economy unsuccesfully restored, unemployment rates are getting higher, created more reasons for British people to hand over the leadership to Conservative leader, David Cameron, which ruling as Prime Minister until now.

Now, if Ed Miliband seriously wants to fix the party's name at British political arena, he should maintain his capabilities in controlling the economy, not to forget full supports he received from trade unions, means he must assure the unemployment rates will decrease, and the taxes for workers are also smaller. At the leadership race, Ed Miliband had insisted supports maintaining the Banker's bonus tax, increasing the annual bank levy, and new financial transactions tax. He also supports a living wage across Britain. Let see what this Oxford and London School of Economics-educated can do.

Like it or not, the new leader has born in UK's Labour Party and in the coming weeks his shadow cabinet will be formed and Labour will take shape. Let the UK's workers along with trade unions pray...

What are You Looking For in Life?

Hmm.. mengistirahatkan pikiran sebentar. I'm currently researching about latest UK's Labour Party's leader election, tapi tiba-tiba pengen nulis sebentar tentang sesuatu yang normal. Bukan tentang politik, ekonomi, atau isu aktual internasional. Bukan berarti politik itu sesuatu yang tidak normal, menurut gue politik itu seksi, tapi sekarang gue lagi pengen jadi sesuatu yang nggak seksi sama sekali, asssiikk :D

Pernah nonton "Into the Wild"? Bagi yang sudah, gue mau nanya (bagi yang belum, ya nonton dong, hehe) : Pernah nggak sih dalam hidup lo, lo merasa seperti yang dirasakan si Christopher (pemeran utama)? Bahwa hidup terasa datar, semuanya berjalan bukan seperti apa yang lo bayangkan, orang lain punya kuasa lebih atas hidup lo melampaui kekuasaan lo sendiri. It feels sucks, I assume. Hal ini yang mendasari Christopher mengambil keputusan radikal untuk meninggalkan rumahnya, keluar dari identitasnya sebagai anak yang akan masuk kuliah dan menjalani serangkaian 'skenario hidup' lain yang telah disiapkan ayahnya, dan malah memilih untuk pergi sendiri tanpa tujuan hanya untuk mencari satu hal: Arti hidup.

Christopher pernah bilang, "The core of mans' spirit comes from new experiences."

Dan mungkin kepercayaannya terhadap kebutuhan dirinya akan pengalaman baru lah, yang membuatnya berani menjalani hidupnya tanpa aturan yang dibuat oleh orang lain, tapi aturannya sendiri. Pergi kepada alam, memakan apa yang disediakan belantara bumi, meninggalkan segala kehidupan materialisme khas perkotaan dewasa ini, dan pada akhirnya, di film Into the Wild diperlihatkan satu pesan penting : Hidup adalah benar-benar tentang memilih.

Sudahkah kita memilih? Gue memilih? Sudahkah gue memilih apa yang hati gue pilih?

Gue 22 tahun, dalam hitungan hari, gue sudah hidup selama kurang lebih 8030 hari.
Jadi selama 8030 hari itu, sudahkah gue menjalaninya sesuai kata hati?

Gue ngiri sama Christopher di film Into the Wild. Dia berani. Dia berani mengesampingkan segala keraguannya, ketakutannya, ketidakpastian yang pasti merambahi pikirannya ketika bingung menentukan apakah tetap dengan nilai-nilai hidup milik orang lain dan tidak bahagia, atau mencari kebahagiaan hidup menurut kata hatinya sendiri.

Dia yakin dengan pilihannya, apapun itu. Bagus atau tidaknya perjalanan yang dia lalui, dia melaluinya dengan bahagia, karena memang itu yang diinginkannya. Ia ingin bebas menatap alam. DIA TAHU APA YANG DIA MAU, and he goes for it!

Gue? Kita? Berani?

Laut Cina Selatan, Politik Bebas Aktif Indonesia, dan Hegemoni Bangsa Han

Hari ini, 24 September 2010 (waktu Amerika Serikat), bertempat di Sekretariat Perserikatan Bangsa Bangsa (PBB), akan diadakan makan siang bersama antara Presiden Barack Obama dengan para pemimpin ASEAN (Association of South-East Asian Nations). Pertemuan yang dinamakan dengan US-ASEAN Summit ini diyakini banyak pihak akan membahas perang klaim Laut Cina Selatan yang semakin memuncak antara beberapa negara anggota ASEAN yang merasa memiliki faktor kekuatan sejarah dengan kawasan perairan ini (let say Vietnam, Filipina, Thailand dan Malaysia), terlebih lagi dengan semakin besarnya sikap egosentris yang ditunjukkan Cina dengan mengklaim sepihak bahwa Cina lah yang paling berhak untuk mengeksplorasi kekayaan alam yang terdapat sepanjang kawasan ini.

Pertanyaan mendasar adalah: Mengapa Laut Cina Selatan?

Jawaban secara singkat dapat diberikan seperti ini : "Kawasan Laut Cina Selatan kaya akan cadangan minyak dan gas alam."

Secara lebih lengkap, alasan paling jelas mengenai mengapa timbul pertentangan dan perang klaim antara banyak negara perihal penguasaan atas kawasan ini adalah seperti yang dijelaskan dalam analisis peneliti CSIS berikut ini :


"Potensi minyak yang terdapat pada Laut Cina Selatan adalah 213 Milyar barel, sedangkan kekayaan minyak yang belum tereskplor dari kawasan ini diperkirakan sebesar 28 Milyar barel. Pada dua pulau yakni Spratly Island dan Paracel Island dinyatakan terdapat endapan minyak sebesar 105 Milyar barel."


Angka-angka pasti belum dapat diberikan untuk kekayaan gas alam kawasan Laut Cina Selatan, namun hal ini telah lebih dulu diantisipasi oleh Pemerintah Cina (Husky Energy bekerjasama dengan Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation) dengan melangsungkan ekspedisi pencarian cadangan gas alam di sekitar Spratly Island , dan mengungkap keberadaan 900 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) hanya pada satu pulau saja.


Jelas lah sekarang mengapa sejak tahun 1974 hingga yang terakhir pada tahun 2002 silam, terdapat beberapa kali military clashes antara beberapa negara yang merasa memiliki hak lebih atas kawasan Laut Cina Selatan, semuanya kembali pada faktor kekayaan alam dan keinginan untuk menguasai hal tersebut melebihi negara manapun. 


Konflik demi konflik terus mengemuka, hingga akhirnya Amerika Serikat mengambil peranan dalam The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), sebuah forum yang diadakan salah satunya guna mengeliminasi 'perang dingin' antara beberapa negara yang memiliki kepentingan terhadap Laut Cina Selatan dan kawasan di sekitarnya. Partisipasi Amerika Serikat pada pertemuan ini disikapi dingin oleh beberapa perwakilan negara pada saat itu, salah satunya dapat dilihat dari pendapat yang diucapkan oleh Menteri Luar Negeri Malaysia, Syed Hamid bin Syed Jaafar Albar : "ASEAN territorial issues were matters for ASEAN discussion, not other international forums."

Indonesia sebagai salah satu negara anggota ASEAN memainkan peran yang cukup signifikan dalam proses penyelesaian kasus ini. Pada tahun 1990, Indonesia menjadi tuan rumah penyelenggaraan "The First Dialogue Workshop"honest broker yang dipilih untuk diperankan oleh Indonesia dalam kasus regional ini bukanlah sesuatu yang tidak beralasan. Melalui pakar hukum lautnya, Hasjim Djalal, Indonesia menegaskan untuk tidak ikut mengklaim salah satu dari dua pulau kaya minyak yang diperebutkan, yakni Spratly Island dan Paracel Island. Hal ini jelas berbeda dengan keteguhan yang dimiliki Vietnam, Thailand, dan Filipina yang terus mengupayakan pembagian keuntungan (profit sharing) dari dua pulau tersebut dengan mengutamakan basis sejarah sebagai alasan utama klaim. Posisi satu-satunya yang mengkaitkan Indonesia dengan konflik teritorial berkepanjangan ini hanyalah : Pulau Natuna (Natuna Island).

Pulau dengan cadangan gas alam sebesar 46 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) ini tidak menjadi bagian dari pertentangan negara-negara lainya hingga pada tahun 1996, Pemerintah Cina merilis peta resmi wilayah penguasaan Cina termasuk batas-batas maritim di dalamnya, dan mengakui Pulau Natuna sebagai salah satu bagian di dalamnya. Pemerintahan Soeharto pada saat itu bereaksi dengan mengirimkan pasukan militer untuk berjaga-jaga di sekitar area kepulauan Natuna, dan mulai melaksanakan proyek produksi gas besar-besaran, yang ternyata tidak disikapi dengan keras oleh Cina.

Peran yang dimainkan oleh Indonesia tidak berhenti sampai disitu, karena pada bulan Juli 2010 kemarin, perwakilan Indonesia (Perwakilan Tetap Republik Indonesia-PTRI New York) mengirimkan tulisan pada UN Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf (CLCS) untuk selanjutnya disebarluaskan kepada seluruh negara anggota PBB, mempertanyakan beberapa klaim yang dilakukan Cina atas kawasan Laut Cina Selatan. Hal ini cukup menimbulkan beragam reaksi dari dunia internasional, seperti salah satunya yang diulas di dalam web The Economist , yang menyimpulkan bahwa " Indonesia's letter is to show just how worried the region is by China's approach."

Benarkah Indonesia khawatir akan sepak terjang politik internasional yang dimainkan bangsa Han terhadap kawasan Laut Cina Selatan? Secara garis besar, keberadaan Laut Cina Selatan berdampak pada volume perdagangan internasional Indonesia dengan beberapa partner loyalnya, seperti Jepang. Arus perdagangan antara kedua negara ini terbukti 3 kali lebih besar dibandingkan dengan yang dilakukan antara Indonesia dengan Cina (walaupun setelah Asian-China Free Trade Agreement diluluskan pada 1 Januari 2010 kemarin). Dan peta ekspor impor antara Indonesia-Jepang sudah tentu melibatkan Laut Cina Selatan. Hal ini dapat dipandang sebagai salah satu unsur kecil (kalau tidak dapat dikatakan sangat kecil) yang menjadi pemikiran Indonesia untuk turut mengeliminasi besarnya porsi kedigdayaan Cina pada kawasan Laut Cina Selatan. Sekali lagi, it's politics we're talking about. And commerce means money politics, isn't it?

Tidak banyak yang dapat dilakukan oleh Indonesia ke depannya untuk mengambil peran signifikan dalam resolusi konflik kawasan ini, melainkan menjadi penengah dalam negosiasi yang ke depannya akan sangat mungkin diperlukan, mengingat aturan yang terdapat di dalam United Nations Conventions on the Law of the Sea 1982 tentang pemecahan masalah batas teritorial laut dan perairan adalah melalui good faith negotiations (walaupun UNCLOS belum secara langsung dilibatkan dalam proses pemecahan masalah kawasan Laut Cina Selatan ini).

Kalau Indonesia dapat secara mulus memainkan peran positif sebagai wujud implementasi nyata dari faham politiknya "Bebas dan aktif" pada pemecahan kasus perang klaim Laut Cina Selatan ini, tentunya akan menjadi 'obat' yang ampuh untuk mengobati luka masyarakat Indonesia yang terlalu kecewa dengan pembenaran politik bebas aktif (kalau tidak dapat dikatakan sebagai bebas-lemah-aktif) Indonesia dalam rentetan konfliknya dengan Malaysia. Mungkin ini bisa pula membuktikan bahwa pemerintah Indonesia memilih scope permainan politik yang lebih menantang, lebih dari sekedar perjalanan diplomasi antara Pejambon dan Putrajaya.

Ayunda Tafsa Afifa

International law student, Gadjah Mada University'11

Sources:

(1). Country Analysis Briefs, Energy Information Administration (EIA);

(2). CIA World Factbook;

(3).TheEconomist:http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2010/08/indonesia_and_south_china_sea

Indonesia – Malaysia Bilateral Ties

“The Impacts of the Past Unfinished Business”

1.The Unspoken Histories

The famously known “Ganyang Malaysia”3, a political phrase sounded firstly by Soekarno during the Indonesia-Malaysia conflict within 1961-1966 probably would have become one of the most provocative anthem about the two countries sentiment during these days. What makes this two “Negara Serumpun” became such a long time enemies that have never been found any slightest solutions?

The other well known political phrase from Soekarno was “JAS MERAH : Jangan Sekali-kali Melupakan Sejarah”4. Bearing in mind that Soekarno’s phrase, to analyze the basic problems between Indonesia and Malaysia, it is important to summarizing the historical moments between these two Southeast Asia’s members (which oftenly being ignored by some people).

The relations between Indonesia and Malaysia consists of various matters ranging from borderlines, migrant workers (especially women), cultural claims, and the latest one : Marine and Sovereignty.

2.Marine Issue : A Crucial Point for State’s Sovereignty

The conflict between Indonesia and Malaysia raised (again) on Friday, August 13th, when three officers of the Indonesia’s Fisheries Ministry were arrested by the Malaysian sea patrol as a response over Indonesia’s action in apprehending seven Malaysian fishermen who entered the Indonesian waters. This was happened at Tanjung Barikat waters, located in Bintan, Riau Island, Indonesia. The statement from Malaysia’s policemen were “It happened inside Malaysia’s water (means Malaysia’s territory).” Based on that argument, three Indonesia’s officers until now arrests by Polisi Diraja Malaysia (Malaysia’s Policemen Unit).

World don’t have to wait too long for the angers, protesters from mass organization named “Bendera (Benteng Demokrasi Rakyat)” threw some dirts to Malaysia Embassy in Jakarta soon after the arrests, and also burnt up the Malaysian flag (Jalur Gemilang Flag). And as a response, press in Malaysia took the issue as a headline.5 Foreign Minister of Malaysia, Anifah Aman, commented on the protest, said, “Bendera wants to have our citizens’ head cut bald and send them home. This is an insult not only for Malaysians, but those Indonesians who are against the violent measure.”

Why Indonesians were madly attacked the embassy and urge the government under Tun Abdul Razak to apologize? First, the incident was happened inside Indonesia’s water, not Malaysia’s territory, so the arrests of three Indonesia’s officials were hardly accepted. Second, the Malaysian sea patrol gave a warn shot before getting the Indonesia’s officers being handcuffed and arrested. It’s violating the Indonesia’s sovereignty!

Looking back at these two countries maritime conflicts, these are some points where the disputes arised:

a)Malacca Strait
b)The South China Sea
c)The Sulawesi Sea
d)Bintan, Riau Island

Marty Natalegawa, Indonesia’s Foreign Minister said in Jakarta, “Malaysia is considered too often violate the sovereignty of Indonesia.” This statement based on official report which shows that in 2010, there were about 14 times offences commited by Malaysia, where 10 times violation by entering Indonesia’s territory, occurred in three different locations : Natuna Island, The Strait of Malacca, and the latest one, Bintan.

Speaking about ‘sovereignty’, in United Nations Charter, article 2 (4), stated:
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations:6
“Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity……”
“No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal…”

(?) How much the marine conflict between Indonesia and Malaysia affects the bilateral relationship among them?
When Malaysian sea patrol arrests three Indonesia officers within Indonesia jurisdiction (territory), three things occurred:

1)Malaysia claimed the territory of Indonesia as their territory (The acquisition). In International Law context, there are special rule governing this issue:
“Every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baselines determined in accordance with this Convention.”7
Every State has a FULL SOVEREIGNTY within their territorial sea, including Indonesia and the Tanjung Barikat in Bintan, Riau Island.

2)Malaysia sea patrol arrests three Indonesian officers within Indonesia’s sea territory while the officers were working at their regular basis.
Article 2 (3) of ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) stated :
“Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes: (1) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity; (2) To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authorities provided for by the legal systems of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; (3) To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.”

3)Malaysia are not welcoming the idea of apologizing to Indonesia government, they rejected any idea of wrongdoing by Malaysia sea patrol, even after Marty Natalegawa claimed Tanjung Barikat as Indonesia territory
Even if Malaysian government claiming in a future about the usage of ‘Right of innocent passage’8, Indonesia government should reject the arguments regarding the points stated in Article 19 (2) of UNCLOS 1982:
“Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea it engages in any of the following activities:

(a)Any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any other manner in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
(b)Any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;
(c)Any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal State;
(d)Any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State;
(e)The launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft;
(f)The launching, landing or taking on board of any military devices;
(g)…………”

3.Dispute Resolution (is it Already Defined as a Dispute?)

The dispute settlement provisions in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are remarkable for their detail and variety. When a dispute arises, the parties must ‘proceed to an exchange of views regarding its settlement by negotiation or other peaceful means’, those peaceful means might be established in advance by agreement between them. Only where settlement is not possible by means chosen by the parties to the dispute would the elaborate dispute settlement provisions of the 1982 Convention come into play.

(1)Negotiation
(2)The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea9
(3)The International Court of Justice
(4)Arbitral Tribunals

“But don’t misunderstand. Once again, if it pertains to our fundamental interests, our sovereignty and our territory, we should of course do what we have to do. There is no compromise.”11 Yudhoyono on Cabinet Meeting, August 30th.

DO WHAT, MR. PRESIDENT?