“Border Spat” Between Indonesia and Malaysia Over The Ambalat Territory


Witnessing the latest “border spat” between Indonesia and Malaysia over the Ambalat territory, one may immediately question: Is this really necessary? Another question would be: Is the dispute truly happening?

In response to the first question, many – perhaps most – of the both Indonesian and Malaysian citizens, would certainly say the oil-rich territory is worth fighting for.

Why? Because the dispute centers over claims to the ownership of the territory which consists of two blocks with potentially huge oil and gas reserves.

Ambalat is a 15,235 square kilometer maritime area located off the coast of east Kalimantan, which both Indonesia and Malaysia claim to be theirs. Geologist Andang Bachtiar estimates that just one of the Ambalat blocks could hold as much as 764 million barrels of oil and 1.4 trillion cubic feet of gas.

Oil and gas have become very important commodities, especially as the world is in urgent need of energy sources and may face an oil crisis in the not-too-distant future.

Oil has become one of the most important factors in the ups and downs of the global economy. It is also oil which has triggered various conflicts in many parts of the oil-rich Middle East, including in the recently reduced Iraqi conflicts and in Iran.

Unless new sources of energy are discovered, the whole world will have to deal with a serious energy problem, sooner than predicted.

It would thus come as no surprise if Indonesia and Malaysia struggled to secure the Ambalat territory. It would be na*ve to say that neither country needs new sources of oil, including the reserves in Ambalat, especially since no reliable energy source has been discovered that could replace the world’s depleting oil reserves.

The second question is of no less importance in observing all the “awkwardness” surrounding this dispute. Speculations were rife that the Ambalat dispute was merely a cover-up for a political campaign to win the sympathy of the Indonesian public ahead of the upcoming presidential election.

The most recent maritime border breach by a Malaysian warship on June 2 was not the first such breach by our neighboring country. Last year, Malaysia reportedly breached the border on 28 separate occasions. This year alone, Malaysian warships have allegedly trespassed across the border nine times.

Upon observing the frequency of violations of these Malaysian warships, it is surprising the Indonesian side, at least publicly, has not adopted more serious measures to confront Malaysia.

Assuming Indonesian warships are obsolete and have out-of-date equipment, the Indonesian Navy is surely not completely toothless against the Malaysian fleet.

Aside from speculations that the Ambalat dispute has been part of a high-ranking political scenario to win the Indonesian public’s sympathy ahead of the July 8 presidential election, should the dispute continue and remain unsettled, won’t it only create disharmony, not just between the two neighboring governments, but most importantly among citizens of both countries?

Geopolitics-wise, a prolonged dispute between the two countries would create instability at least within Southeast Asia and could disrupt the unity of ASEAN.

Wasn’t it unpleasant enough when we witnessed the sensitive issues surrounding the treatment of the TKI (Indonesian Migrant Workers) in Malaysia, or the recent dispute over patent claims to cultural products such as batik designs and traditional dances?

It is widely feared that the Ambalat issue could add fuel to residual anger and resentment, mainly on the Indonesian side, since Indonesia lost its two islands – Sipadan and Ligitan – to Malaysia after The Hague-based International Court of Justice ruled in favor of Malaysia in December 2002.

A recent trivial wedding and family dispute involving Indonesian model Manohara Odelia Pinot and Kelantan Prince Tengku Muhammad Fakhry of Malaysia saw the emergence of the less well-known Lasykar Merah-Putih (The Red-and-White Paramilitary Unit), which has blatantly supported Manohara.

In the event that the Ambalat dispute continues, or worse expands into conflict, an emergence of angry militias similar to the Lasykar Merah-Putih, would not be inconceivable.

While leaders from Indonesia and Malaysia may be misguided in their policies, they are not necessarily aggressive. Also, they generally do not plan to start wars on the basis of cold-blooded calculations, but they may blunder into one if they lose control of the situation.

The last scenario, I am 100 percent certain, is not expected by either Indonesia and Malaysia. Thus, it is advisable, especially for Malaysia, not to provoke the border dispute into a dangerous war game by stopping the “border breaches” of its warships.

In the mean time, Malaysia and Indonesia should go back to the diplomatic table to settle the dispute. Or, if diplomatic channels fail, there is another elegant mechanism of dispute settlement – through a “battle in court”.(jakartapost)

Popularity: 11% [?]

Related Post

This entry was posted on Friday, June 12th, 2009 and is filed under Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Sponsors

Text Link Ads HighProfits Affiliate Program Affiliate Banner

 

March 2010
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Anton Sujarwanto: Makasih infonya, sayang saya nggak masuk kriteria.
  • catalog directory: gr8 resrch bro?
  • Reseller Hosting: Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you...
  • Riley: Really great blog here. Thanks! :)
  • Macy: I enjoyed reading your blog.

Others

RSS Sulumits Retsambew Review

  • Statistic update for sulumits retsambew - 27 days left
    Sulumist retsambew's position continues to fluctuate especially the first page of google for keyword sulumits retsambew. Here is the list of sulumits retsambew`s position:#1.http://www.sulumitsretsambew.org/#2.http://www.sulumitsretsambew.org/day-109-of-sulumits-retsambew-contest/#3.http://www.sulumitsretsambewblog.com/#4.http://www.sulumitsretsambewblo […]

Teen drug education also helps curb risky sexual behavior, study finds

School-based drug education programs for adolescents can have a long-term positive impact on sexual behavior in addition to curbing substance abuse, according to a new RAND Corporation study.

Researchers found that young adults who had been exposed to a popular drug abuse prevention program as adolescents were less likely to engage in risky sexual behavior five to seven years later, according to the findings published online by the Journal of Adolescent Health. The study provides the strongest evidence to date that drug abuse prevention programs can also curb risky sexual practices in young adulthood.

“The lessons these young people learned about how to avoid drug and alcohol abuse appears to have had a positive impact on their sexual behavior as well,” said Phyllis Ellickson, the lead author of the study and a researcher at RAND, a nonprofit research organization.

The study found that youth exposed to a drug abuse education program were significantly less likely as young adults to either engage in sex with multiple partners or to have unprotected sex because of drug and alcohol use than their peers who had not received the training.

However, researchers found that those who received drug prevention training were no more likely to use condoms consistently than their peers who did not receive the training.

The RAND Health study tracked the experiences of 1,901 unmarried 21-year-olds who took part in a randomized controlled trial of Project ALERT, a drug use prevention program for middle school students developed by RAND. Study participants were exposed to Project ALERT while they attended middle school in South Dakota.

Among the participants, 631 attended schools that received 14 Project ALERT lessons during middle school, 499 attended schools that received 10 additional lessons during high school and 771 attended schools that did not offer the Project ALERT program.

While risky sexual behavior was common among the study participants, such behavior was less prevalent among those exposed to Project ALERT.

Young adults exposed to Project ALERT were both less likely to have sex with multiple partners (44 percent versus 50 percent) and to have unprotected sex because of drug use (27 percent versus 32 percent) than their peers who had not been exposed to the program.

About 71 percent of study participants reported inconsistent use of condoms, regardless of whether they had been exposed to Project ALERT.

Researchers say that part of the differences between the two groups may be due to the lower use of drugs and alcohol among those exposed to Project ALERT since the behavior is linked to risky sexual practices. But the differences in sexual behavior between the two groups were not entirely explained by the lower substance use levels.

“Although the effects we found are somewhat modest, these findings show that the benefits of drug abuse prevention programs are not confined to drug use alone and can continue for many years after young people receive the instruction,” Ellickson said.

The study found no significant difference in risky sexual behavior between study participants who received the basic Project ALERT lessons in middle school and those who also received extended Project ALERT lessons during ninth and 10th grades.

Ellickson said the study findings are particularly relevant for school officials across the nation who are facing significant budget cuts in the months ahead.

“The findings support the case for the cost-effectiveness of the basic Project ALERT program by showing it provides benefits for two different types of risky behaviors and by showing that those benefits are long lasting,” Ellickson said.
Source: RAND Corporation

Popularity: 1% [?]