[RECAP] Beyond the Great Wall #8: China 2020: Traditional and Nontraditional Security Challenges

Amidst the pandemic that demands self-quarantine and working from home, Institute of International Studies Universitas Gadjah Mada managed to assemble the forum of Beyond the Great Wall #8 online through Google Meet on May 15, 2020. In its eighth edition, Beyond the Great Wall invited two speakers to discuss both traditional and nontraditional security challenges China is facing in 2020. Our first speaker Fadhil Sulaeman, who is currently serving as the Head of Research and Development for Student Association of Belt and Road Initiative (SABRI) UGM Chapter, delivered a presentation on the topic of “China’s Strategy in South China Sea”. Meanwhile, our second speaker Muhammad Reza, currently serving as a media analyst in PT Indonesia Indikator, addressed the topic of “China’s Medical Insurance System”. Also present in last Friday’s forum were Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro, currently acting as the Head of International Relations Department of UGM as well as the convener of Beyond the Great Wall, and Lucke Haryo S. P., IIS UGM library staff, as moderator.

The forum starts with Fadhil explaining the importance of the South China Sea conflict. Three reasons exhibit this conflict’s significance: (1) the entrance of foreign vessels into Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone; (2) claims from Indonesia’s ASEAN neighbors on the conflict; (3) the involvement of the United States and China as important actors in international politics. South China Sea is a highly strategic territory due to abundance in natural resources, as well as its role as the main route for international trade. Furthermore, the disputed waters are infamous for various transnational crimes, ranging from trade of illegal goods to human and drug trafficking. Considering said strategic values of South China Sea, seven countries have put up overlapping claims on the territory. Fadhil pointed out three main islands on dispute, namely the Spratly Islands, the Paracel Islands, and the Scarborough Shoal. All three were of great significance to China’s interest, both in the ASEAN region and in international politics.

While describing the China-United States dynamics in the South China Sea conflict, Fadhil stated that confrontation between the two occurred as a result of different legal basis adopted to justify respective claims. The United States referred to Freedom of Navigation Operations as a result of international arbitration process, declaring South China Sea as international waters, resulting in freedom of movement and absence of obligation to report upon passage. On the other hand, China rejected the verdict and insisted on adhering to the principle of Innocent Passage. The principle implicates the obligation for vessels to report upon passage, as well as limited movement. Overlapping claims, combined with different stances on UNCLOS, made confrontation inevitable. However, China-United States confrontation has always been mere intimidation hitherto, i.e. Chinese and American vessels sailing in immediate vicinity of each other a while ago, and never resulted in an armed confrontation. Fadhil wrapped up his presentation with response to the question of whether the United States is bold enough to initiate physical confrontation with China.

“The United States is the only country capable of outdoing China’s naval force. However, escalating the conflict will present the United States as an aggressor. Hence, provocation and intimidation should be taken as solutions” Fadhil answered.

The second session focused on nontraditional security challenges China is facing in 2020, particularly in public health matters. Muhammad Reza began his presentation with an interesting fact: the Chinese government has only reformed its medical insurance system in 2015, relatively recent compared to Indonesia who launched its new insurance system in the first term of President Joko Widodo’s presidency. In order to improve its health services, China allocated 850 million yuan to support three types of insurance scheme: (1) the urban employment-based basic medical insurance, aimed for the working class living in cities; (2) urban resident medical insurance for children and students; (3) new rural cooperative medical scheme for rural residents. All types of subsidy apply for the entire Chinese population, except those in Macau and Hong Kong.

Reza made clear that although reformed, the Chinese medical insurance system is still flawed. The reimbursement rate for inpatient care facilities is still low and continues to decrease. Consequently, the government persistently attempts to refine its system, notably during the emergence of COVID-19 in China and its spread worldwide. Many parties view that the government’s approach in handling the spread of the virus is effective, covering lockdowns, strict supervision, as well as deployment of government intelligence agents and face recognition technology to track citizens. At the moment, the government is pursuing the development of artificial intelligence to prevent similar outbreaks in the future. Reza asserted that the significant budget will eventually be able to advance the system.

The forum is concluded with statements from Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro. Indonesia and the international community, according to Nur Rachmat, should not slack in keeping up with the issue of South China Sea despite the pandemic. Indonesia and ASEAN should not give in to China. In fact, Indonesia is under great obligation to ensure regional stability, particularly if China’s strategy threatens Indonesia’s straits. Meanwhile, in discussing China’s medical insurance system, Nur Rachmat affirmed that it is normal for China to have reformed its system only recently, followed by the ambition to develop artificial intelligence with an even larger budget than the United States’. Nur Rachmat argued that the employment of artificial intelligence by the Chinese government in the future will be massive, not only to tackle COVID-19, but also track its citizens.


Writer : Brigitta Kalina Tristani Hernawan

Editor : Medisita Febrina

[RECAP] Round Table Discussion: Global Development of Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS) and Its Implications on Indonesia’s Foreign Policy and Defense

On Friday (6/3), Institute of International Studies, International Relations Department of Universitas Gadjah Mada collaborated with International Relations Department of Universitas Paramadina in organizing Round Table Discussion on Global Development of Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS) and its implications on Indonesia’s foreign policy and defense. The event was attended by various stakeholders, ranging from government, scholars, the military, researchers, and experts who proceeded to discuss the matter in hand from different perspectives.

According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the working definition of autonomous weapons (also known as autonomous weapon systems/lethal autonomous weapon systems/killer robots) is a weapon system that possesses autonomy in executing its critical functions of selecting and attacking target without human intervention. Their development is a consequence of the industrial revolution. The lethality of this type of weapon is not inherent in itself. Instead, it depends on the characteristics of the weapons and how they are deployed.

Autonomous weapons are strongly related to international humanitarian law. Notwithstanding their close ties with war practices, there exists a discourse of the use of autonomous weapons in peace, particularly for law enforcement purposes. Many believe the weapon systems are capable of precise targeting, yet the debate on the risk of cyber attack during deployment persists, which constitutes the problem of accountability and alleged violation of international humanitarian law. The debate focuses upon who is responsible: the field operator, the commander, or the creator of its algorithm?

Beside legal considerations, ethics also need to be taken into account. In the forum, questions such as “will autonomous weapons be able to comply with international humanitarian law principles?”, “to what extent should humans have control on weapons?”, “as autonomous weapons are allowed to select and decide upon targets on their own, should it be considered crossing the line?” arose.

Thus far, Indonesian government has not taken a firm stance on the issue. Indonesia still serves as an observer and not a state party to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). While Indonesia is not against the accession of the Convention, the government might have other priorities. That said, Indonesia has not come to the realization of the urgency and potential threat of the weapon to humanity, keeping in mind the existence of autonomous weapons will, slowly but surely, develop enormous destructive effect.

It is imperative that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with support from all national agencies, act as the frontline in convincing the government to access CCW. Moreover, CCW need to be translated into Bahasa in order to transform it into national law. In the future, Indonesia is also expected to increase participation in the forum. Otherwise, the discussion will only stay in academic domain.

As business of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is also in trend, Indonesia doesn’t want to be left out. Presiden Joko Widodo wished for UAVs to be developed. However, UAVs were not intended to be weapons originally, but to execute the mission of 3D: dull, dirty, dangerous. In other words, such aircrafts weren’t built to be armed. It changed, later, after the national army Tentara Nasional Indonesia (TNI) decided that drones should execute military missions. As much as UAV is beneficial, it can disrupt traffic airline, more so when armed. Unlike autonomous weapons, UAV is already regulated under several ministerial regulations.

The existence of autonomous weapons is highly dilemmatic. Their use is beneficial as they will not be able to experience fear, as well as select and attack targets on their own. Furthermore, they are less costly to deploy. On the other hand, autonomous weapons raise questions on the aspects of chivalry, humanity, and morality in war. In this situation, international humanitarian law plays a central role. Instead of limiting a country’s military advancement, international humanitarian law ensures that steps taken by states are in line with humanitarian principles. Its existence highlights how lack of regulation on autonomous weapons brings about concerns of accountability when violation occurs.

Right now, the utmost priority should be placed on defining typology of LAWS, as there is no existing consensus on the term autonomous weapon systems (AWS). Scholars ought to conduct research regarding autonomous weapons since it is a collective responsibility to create discourse on the urgency of the matter. It is important to note that the situation of AWS now is more complex compared to nuclear weapons. Total ban on autonomous weapons is difficult since the weapons are beneficial for military strategy, namely in efficiency and effectivity when destroying opponents in a shorter period. In addition, AWS also possess defensive aspects, making it even more difficult to entirely abolish them. In brief, the problem of AWS lies not on the core of their existence, but rather on how they are deployed.


Writer: Denise Michelle
Translator: Medisita Febrina

Globalization Talk #3 : Globalization Talk and Educating on Globalization

On Monday (24/02), Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM) conducted the third session of the acclaimed Globalization Talk discussion with the theme “Global Citizenship and Educating on Globalization”. On this occasion, IIS UGM have the opportunity to invite Prof. Dr. Ayami Nakaya, Associate Professor at Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation (IDEC), Hiroshima University, accompanied by Dr. Riza Noer Arfani, Director of IIS UGM to deliver the materials regarding the matter of globalization, global citizenship and education in encountering the phenomenon of globalization. Besides the speakers, IIS UGM also invited Cut Intan Aulianisa Isma, Manager of IIS UGM who is the moderator of the event, as well as several High school teacher representatives athwart Yogyakarta as the guest participant of the event.

Nakaya opened the session by deliberating the quintessential temporal phenomenon of globalization. Globalization unequivocally asserts global implications to various stakeholders, let it be positive nor negative impacts it induces. Ad exemplum, one of the positive impacts imposed by Globalization would be its instantaneous information diffusion, ergo the public have faster access to information. Inasmuch, an expeditious transfer of information prompted the trend of false information dispersal (hoax) nor information that has not been approved of its validity, hence instigating panic and unrest to the public. The introduction was closed with a compelling rhetorical question by Nakaya; “who is capable of averting the negative implications and optimizes the positive aspects of Globalization?”.

The discussion session was recommended by Nakaya by ruminating the exegesis of “Global Citizenship”. Global Citizenship is a solution which asserts public mobility in encountering the impacts of globalization, may it be positive nor negative effects. Nakaya elaborates, that global citizenship can be marked through several features, which is (1) capable of accepting diversity and respect to human rights, (2) exhibiting a collaborative mindset in the sense of exercising dispute settlement mechanisms through cooperative and collective means in the absence of conflict, and (3) situating a positive and active key role in sustaining order among the global community. In order for an individual to possess such features, the paramount importance of honing ones attitude, deep knowledge, cognitive skills, non-cognitive skills and behavioral capabilities should be exercised.

 

 

In order to obtain such key elemental features, globalization education comes to place in fostering such skills. Globalization education acts to foster a just political literacy, sense of violence, and an orientation to social justice. By nature political literacy is mandatory in order to decipher globalization and its implications, hence we can respond properly to the dispersal of globalization. Sense of violence is the awareness to any form of violence, starting from direct violence to ecological violence. The social justice aspect is marked by the apprehension to the concept of justice that is not rigid and sundry in nature, consequently it erects an intellection to assure justice and equality to all parties. The aforementioned aspects can be elaborated through the process of globalization education which should be implemented in Indonesia.

In order to escalate the quality of Global Citizenship, Nakaya offers the concept of Resident Oriented Tourism as a means of development. Resident Oriented Tourism by itself is a form of reciprocal tourism interaction, which does not only bring profit to the tourists that are visiting but also to its local communities, as well it leverages the quality development of human resources in the tourist attraction. In order to realize such practices, the elements of local communities should actively participate in implementing the practices of tourism, and alter the value and image of exclusivity with values that are amiable to global diversity. Nakaya stipulates Yogyakarta as a suitable location in implementing resident oriented tourism and globalization education, due to its status as the epicenter of culture and education in Indonesia. The Special Region of Yogyakarta can act as the hub of global citizenship education through the methods of resident oriented tourism by upholding the value of conviviality, sense of pride to local culture, creativity and active participation in fabricating a tourist destination that is capable of accepting the global community.

The revelation evinced by Nakaya is closed by Riza, who expresses his support towards the importance of Yogyakarta as the epicenter of education and economy in Indonesia. Yogyakarta poses a lucrative potential as a prospective tourist region, and offers the potential in the exchange of ideas, experience and information. The education sector can act as an anchor for the pivot of tourism development. As the director of IIS, Riza also stipulates the affirmed and willingness of IIS in support of educating the community of Yogyakarta pertaining to globalization, which is in line to the stream of research conducted by IIS in the manifestation of advocating. Such alacrity is reflected by the conduct of the previous two antecedent Globalization Talk, viz – Globalization Talk #1 (Jogja Creative Industry Forum) and #2 (Jogja Tourism and Governance Forum) by IIS UGM.


Author : Raditya Bomantara

Editor : Handono Ega P.

Beyond the Great Wall #7 : China’s Challenge in early 2020

Beyond the Great Wall #, 7 is the first edition of the notorious Beyond the Great Wall Forum that occurs in the year of 2020. On this occasion, the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM) invited two key speakers to scrutinize the threats to China in the early years of 2020 which may impede the economic development of China. For the main speaker, IIS UGM invited Nurrudin Al Akbar, a doctoral student in Political Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada brought up the topic titled as “Wuhan Jiayou: China’s tale in Challenging the Social Construct in the Era of Pot-Truth?”, Dr. Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro, a lecturer in the discipline of International Relations, Universitas Gadjah Mada became the second speaker who brought out a contextualization in the book “Red Flags: Why Xi’s China is in Jeopardy?”. In this BTGW series, IIS UGM invited Indrawan, a researcher at IIS UGM as the moderator.

As we all know that in early 2020, China struggles to face the dire dispersion of the Coronavirus disease 209 (Covid2019), which has now become a global pandemic that spans through a myriad of states globally. Nuruddin stipulates that there is a trend of narration and construction by the International media nor the Western which situated China as the “convict” who initiated the Coronavirus. The construction and narration become relevant, due to its capability to influence the international community’s perspective towards China. Hence, creating an accusation over China’s negligence in hindering the dispersion of the aforementioned virus. According to Nuruddin the negative construction towards China by in turn may hamper the Chinese government’s efforts in managing the spread of coronavirus.

This particular trend is abbreviated by Nurudin as the era of “Post Truth”—in which information that is fashioned in such manner consequently erects uncertainty and a vexatious environment to the masses. The information that is fabricated and given to the public regarding the existence and mitigating measures utilized, by in turn becomes the trigger to several problematics, such as fret towards the spread of the virus, excessive fear, the lack of trust towards the government, and to its peak, would be the inception of Sino phobic sentiments and racism directed towards the global Chinese ethnicity. Ironically, the construction towards uncertainty has previously occurred during the spread of the SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) epidemic as well as the MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) epidemic.

 

The phenomenon of “Wuhan Jiayou” that occurs in Wuhan, that is the center of the Coronavirus spread is remarked by Nuruddin to be potentially vexing in facing the construction within the era of Post Truth, which also includes the complication in managing the dispersion of the coronavirus. The Chinese government should appeal to the Wuhan Jiayou spirit in order to deconstruct and foster the awareness of synergetic movements in tackling the spread of the virus. The impact imparted by the Wuhan Jiayou has the effect of deconstruction directed towards the Western media which inclines to postulate on racist based elucidation towards China. Ergo, by changing such narration to a new narration that postulates on the notion of human integrity and unity, exhibits an image that the Wuhan community of China requires a moral foundation and support in facing the corona epidemic.

Notwithstanding, if the first session contemplates over the complications that the Chinese government faces in tackling the Coronavirus, the second session postulates over the book review of “Red Flags: Why Xi’s China is in Jeopardy?” by Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro.  In order to decipher over the reality in which the Chinese government under Xi Jinping’s’ administration is in jeopardy, the book explores on four different key points that may threaten and destabilize the economic growth of China, in correlation to the symbolization and philosophy of the Chinese flag (Red Flags).

The first issue faced by the Chinese government would be the debt issues, in which contemporary Chinese economic growth is steered by debt which may dismantle Chinese economic stability. This also correlates to the second issue that is the Yuan and Renminbi currency that is still swayed by the Chinese government in the context of mobility and exchange rate. The third issue would be the Middle-Income trap, which is caused by the state control over several industrial sectors, hence causing difficulties for China to advance their next stage of development. The fourth issue would be the aging population phenomenon, hence rendering an unproductive working-age population. Four of these issues are regarded to negate Chinese economic development to the possibility of collapse. Furthermore, four of these issues may threaten the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party and it may erect distrust by the public towards the party, hence leaving it to a state of Jeopardy as emphasized by Magnus.      


Writer : Raditya Bomantara
Editor: Handono Ega P.

IIS UGM Visit to PT Dirgantara Indonesia: Considering Drone Development Prospect in Indonesia

Indonesian should be proud with the newly-introduced Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) drone named Elang Hitam (translated as: Black Eagle), on the end December 2019. Responding the newly-introduced drone, Raditya Bomantara, S.IP, Farah Andri, S.Ds, dan Denise Michelle from Disseminationa and Outreach of Institute of International Studies Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM) visited the headquarter of PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PT DI) as a part of the global movement: Campain on Killer Robots, on Monday (20/01/2020). Muhammad Nainar and Ardya Paradipta from PT DI, as a representative from the team that developed the drone, briefed our team from IIS about Elang Hitam drone that day. The goal of our visit is to earn more informations and discuss further about the development of MALE drone and the use of its technology in Indonesia

MALE Elang Hitam is a project initiated by the Ministry of Defence, which also involves Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology, Indonesian Air Force’s Research and Development body, and Bandung Institue of Technology, National Institute of Aeronautics and Space, PT DI, and PT Len Industri. Facing many difficulties in supervising the country borders became the start of Indonesian drone development. The lack of supervision on the borders had become an opportunity for smugglers, which then costs the government a fair amount. For that reason, MALE drone will be operated as a surveillance device for the borders with an intensive sortie (up to 24 hours), which would be impossible if the government use conventional aircraft.

There is a plan to arm MALE Elang Hitam, however, Nainar assured that the MALE developd right now is still far-fetched from what we know as Killer Robots. Ardya infromed that MALE drone will act as a reconnaissance, with borders surveillance sortie to transfer images using camera to the mission control. Those image then would be processed by the operator, before deciding further actions. This shows that the operational of MALE drone has not been fully autonomous and still dependant on human in the loop. Even if it is unarmed, MALE will still be able to help border surveillance by sending needed informations that later will be processed by the Indonesian Army.

At the end of the discussion, to reassure people worries about the use of MALE as killer robots, Nainar repeated that Indonesia still has a long way from adopting the killer robots technology. Other than technological factors, the MALE drone performance still need to be assessed and developed until it could be licensed and operated. The MALE technology will be used to supervise borders and not as a weapon since it is what Indonesia needs right now. MALE will also be potential in disaster mitigation such as forest fire, flood, and landslide. MALE will also be useful to get atmosphere imagery that will help with weather forecast. It has a lot more possible benefits other than just as a weapon of destruction if the government used it selectively and carefully.

After the discussion, our team had a chance to visit other facilities inside PT DI to directly observe the drone Wulung, which is the MALE predecessor, also some vehicles that operates as the mission control for the drones. Our team wrapped the visit with a photo session and token exchange with the representatives of PT DI.


Author : Denise Michelle, Raditya Bomantara

Editor : Angganararas Indriyosanti, Muhammad Nainar PT DI

Press Conference #2 Natuna Waters Dispute : Legality of Nine Dash Line

On Tuesday (14/1), the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM) held a press conference to discuss two important issues in international politics in early 2020. One of them is the territorial dispute of Natuna waters between  Indonesia and China.

Indrawan Jatmika, researcher at IIS UGM said that Indonesian government tends to move too slowly and is less responsive in responding to actions taken by China, who disrupts the North Natuna Sea by the inclusion of fishing boats and coast guard patrols that trespasses Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). China often uses its historical setting, namely nine dash lines, as its foundation to claim the South China Sea region. Even though these nine dash lines clearly contradicts UNCLOS and intersects with Indonesia’s EEZ boundaries.

“The steps Indonesia is currently taking tend to try to tackle rather than to prevent the problem, because the issue in South China Sea was brought to attention at the beginning of the decade of 2010, especially in 2013-2014 when China began to have power due to rapid economic development,” Indrawan said.

Since the beginning of his administration in 2014, President Jokowi felt that the South China Sea case was not an Indonesian affair, therefore, there was no need for Indonesian interference. This then became a mindset that continues to this day. So when an issue like this occurs, the government is not ready and yet has a strategy to deal with it. As a result, each of the ministries’ responsibilities were intertwined, with each ministry having its own position to overcome this issue.

With Indonesia’s tendency ignoring this issue, Indonesia loses the opportunity to become an ASEAN leader. In fact, since the creation of ASEAN in 1967, Indonesia has always been regarded as the leader of ASEAN. This is quite unfortunate according to Indrawan. Indonesia should be able to lead and multilaterally consolidate ASEAN member countries to determine joint steps and attitudes to respond to China, while bringing this issue to various international forums on behalf of ASEAN.

Domestically, Indonesia also needs to be more assertive and ready to overcome this issue. Sending the military to Natuna or building a military base to Natuna doesn’t mean that Indonesia challenges China into a open war, but rather shows the readiness of Indonesia to defend it’s territorial sovereignty.

 

Indrawan’s explanation was followed by a presentation by Randy Wirasta Nandyatama, UGM lecturer in International Relations and an expert on Southeast Asian politics and security studies. According to Randy, this Chinese presence in Natuna is important because the fishing boats are escorted by coast guards who according to UNCLOS are paramilitary, because they are assisted by the state by providing escorts. This is the problem and makes the whole ordeal more complicated.

According to Randy, China took this action because it depended on the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China (CPC). The CPC can continue to rule if it can guarantee economic growth, maintain territorial integrity, and love of the motherland’s propaganda (nationalism).

“The territorial integrity point is a point that intersects with this case, because the CPC must defend the South China Sea which is considered as rightful territory of China. Most likely, the Chinese Government will find it difficult to retreat because according to China, the South China Sea is important for Chinese territorial integrity, “Randy said.

Previously, Indonesia limited its involvement in the issue of the South China Sea because Indonesia did not claim the Spratly Island in the waters of the South China Sea, so that previously there had been no dispute and direct contact between Indonesia and China. But now, it is important for Indonesia to be actively involved and more responsive in overcoming violations of regional sovereignty. Because in an international dispute, a country that can take care of an area and manage it seriously, it will be seen as more important and more appropriate for that region. This is what China is trying to pursue.

In line with what Indrawan said earlier, Indonesia’s response was considered to be less coordinated. The various ministry and institutions involved do not have uniform responses to this issue. So what can be done by the government is to coordinate more seriously and make stronger and well directed diplomacy efforts to maintain Natuna waters.

“Indonesia has so far ignored the historical fishing rights of China, so Indonesia needs to go deeper into the foundation and reasons for China to intervene in Natuna. “There is also a need for an agreement option between the two countries where the two countries can work together and utilize resources simultaneously,” Randy concluded his presentation.


Author: Denise Michelle

Editor: Angganararas Indriyosanti

Press Conference #1 : US and Iran Conflict Escalation after the Death of General Soleimani

Tuesday (01/14/2020), Institute of International Studies, Department of International Relations, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM) held a press conference responding the issue of conflict escalation between the United States and Iran. The murder of Major General Qasem Soleimani by the US drone attack escalate the tension between the two countries. This raises fears of a war between the two countries, which could possibly trigger World War III. To analyze the possibility of the aforementioned war, there are several things to consider. On this occasion, IIS UGM invited Dr. Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro, Head of the Department of International Relations Universitas Gadjah Mada and Yunizar Adiputera, MA., Lecturer at the Department of International Relations Universitas Gadjah Mada.

The United States has a long history of involvement in the Middle East region due to Israel’s existence as the US’ closest ally. It is no secret that the US is the enemy of most Middle Eastern countries. On the other hand, Iran is one of the US enemies who aggressively continues to develop its strength, and in response US is always trying weaken and hinder the development of Iran. The killing of Soleimani can be interpreted as US latest effort, with the justification that Soleimani had the intention to attack several strategic targets in the US.

But in reality, the justification’s validity mentioned by the White House is still unproven. On the contrary, there are statements stating that Donald Trump carrying out the attack as a diversion of issues to reduce the burden on the US domestic affairs. One of them being Trump’s impeachment, as well as an effort to boost Trump’s popularity in the upcoming election. This tactic was also used by former US President, George H. Bush Sr. who intervened in the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. However, this strategy can turn against Trump if Trump’s political opponents use the economic issue as consideration in initiating war, whereas the condition of the US economy is actually not strong enough to support a war economy if the US declare war with Iran.

 

 

Can the US attack that killed Major General Qasem Soleimani be justified under International Law?

“It is difficult to justify (the attack). According to international law, the logic that has been built so far is only that (General Qasem Soleimani) is a terrorist, while according to international law, attacks can only be carried out on the basis of self-defense or if there is an imminent threat “

-Yunizar Adiputera, M.A, Lecturer in the Department of International Relations, Gadjah Mada University.-

In addition to the problems of US domestic affairs, there is a problem with the validity of attacks carried out against Soleimani under the international humanitarian law. An attack can only be justified as an act of self-defense or in response to an imminent threat. Trump said that this attack was a form of US self-defense against plans and acts of terrorism driven by Soleimani. It is difficult to justify the validity of the attack on Soleimani because until now, there has been no significant evidence of the threat brought by Qasem Soleimani. In addition, whether the attack are legal or not, the attack that killed Soleimani was also an unwise and unreasonable decision, because it could create a crisis and escalate conflict in the Middle East region.

 

Will the conflict between the two countries escalate so that it can trigger World War III?

“The United States and Iran both possess nuclear power, and if they fight, it will only create large-scale damage and the prospect of MAD (mutually assured destruction)”

-Dr. Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro, Head of the Department of International Relations, Gadjah Mada University –

For now, the possibility of World War III is considered by both interviewees as an unrealistic possibility due to several factors. First, the political situation is very different from the situation before World War I and II, where the majority of countries avoid open warfare and choose diplomacy. Second, the domestic factors of the two countries in conflict. On one hand, the US is affected by weak public support for war and also economies that are not ready for large-scale war, and on the other, Iran also has a military force far more inferior than the US, and the choice to declare war to US can lead to strategic blunders. Third, the prospect of mutually assured destruction that will occur because both the US and Iran both have nuclear weapons, which if used will only cause large-scale damage and harm both US and Iran along with other countries involved.

 

What can Indonesia do?

At the end of the session, the two speakers reminded of the significance of diplomacy in the modern era. DIHI and IIS UGM will always prioritize diplomacy and will not promote warfare as a solution. Although many parties consider the prestige of diplomacy to be less popular after several phenomena such as Brexit and Trump who prefer to use the power of the United States over diplomatic channels, in reality diplomacy has become more important than in previous eras. In this case, the Government of Indonesia can use diplomacy to prevent conflicts between the United States and Iran from escalating further.

 


Author: Raditya Bomantara

Editor: Denise Michelle

Beyond the Great Wall #6: Reconciliation of Economy and Environment

Environmental interests often clashes with economic ones, as if we have to choose one and sacrifice the other. However, one of the eco-city projects in China, Tianjin Eco-City, says otherwise. Arinda Putri, Bachelor of Political Science from Department of International Relations Universitas Gadjah, shared the results of her research on this matter in the 6th Beyond the Great Wall (BTGW), a bi-monthly public discussion organized by the Institute of International Studies on political, social, or economic issues related to China, on Friday (6/12). Alongside Arinda, M. Irsyad Abrar, student from Department of International Relations, and Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro, Head of the Department and the initiator of Beyond the Great Wall, attended the event as speakers.

In Irsyad Abrar’s explanation related to the challenges and responses of China to its energy security, it was conveyed that, until today, coal is still dominantly used in China, regardless of the environmental complication it caused.

“… in volume, (the use of coal) jumped very dramatically. This problem rises in line with the rise of China as the country with the second largest economy in the world.”, said Abrar.

Domestic pressure from the citizens, especially on the East Coast, as well as pressure from the global community has led China to try to use energy perceived ‘cleaner’ than coal, namely petroleum, natural gas and other new renewable energies. However, these resources have not been able to replace the massive use of coal. This is because the increased supply of alternative resources has not been able to match the speed of energy consumption increase in China.

“Several news channels reported that numerous coal mines are closing. In fact, a number of new coal mines, in Northeast China region of Manchuria, gained the permission to open recently.”, added Abrar.

Although a tone that tends to be pessimistic appears from the coal sector, the Tianjin Eco-City project brings a breath of fresh air in Chinese ecological discourse. Responding to the surge of coal consumption in China, various efforts were being done, including the establishment of Eco-City projects.

“There are several eco-city projects that have been initiated by the Chinese government since 2003. Most of them failed, but the Tianjin Eco-City project in collaboration with the Singapore government proves otherwise,” said Arinda.

This cooperation is carried out by means of exchanging resources between Singapore and China, namely  the transfer of water resources technology by enforcing the sovereignty of the water sector; procurement of water reclamation facilities; and restoration of Lake Jing, which functions as pollution disposal target  for over four decades.

“Through this collaboration, Tianjin has  become the first city in China where people are able to drink tap water.” explained Arinda further.

From an economic perspective, the impact of this collaboration is massive, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has increased since 2007. Moreover, in 2010-2014, Tianjin have had more than 10,000 tourists and 1000 companies with interest in investing.

A low-carbon behavior was also shown by residents of Tianjin Eco-City. One results of research conducted to local resident stated that 67.3% of respondents said they were willing to pay a monthly premium to support environmentally friendly electricity. Along with it, an environment-related education is also being taught from primary school. As a result, citizens from grass-root level acquired a better understanding of the concept of green and eco-city.

On the downside, this cooperation has allowed a wider sphere of authority owned by the companies. This has led to several compliance issues and surge other problems to local politics.

Nevertheless, the Eco City cooperation have cracked an answer to an ‘either or’ case of economy and environment, a long overdue debate.

At the end of the discussion, Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro symbolically closed the discussion to mark the end of the first BTGW  series. All six discussion conducted in this series has been an insightful introduction  to China’s politics and social issues. Beyond the Great Wall series will come back with a new format next year, stay in touch!

 

Author: Sonya Teresa Debora
Editor: Thifani Tiara Ranti