Weaponry Spending Spree

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,053
Reactions
18 18,523
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
For what? Look after Prabowo visit, not only China Made blatant disregard toward our Sovereign over North Natuna Sea, but not long after there is Covid19 case in which had happened in Wuhan!!! And now amid pandemic China keep increased their presence in South China Sea and using vacsine they are developing (in which i am quite suspicious on how they are able to complete Vacsine development in less than one year, meanwhile incubation process and selection of strain and sampling process should need much more longer time) China using Kungflu as biological weapons as diplomatic tools and coerce other to push their interest toward other countries.
That is pretty obvious, but you'll have to shift your balance more towards west. Smooth moves is needed.

You'll need to acquire whichever vaccine you can get your fingers in. the Oxford vaccine seems to be the cheapest compared to Pfizer-Biontechs by 1/6 of the price, though effective on 70%. But I'd get my fingers on as many different as possible. Look at other countries who are successfully developing it as well.

I'd already predicted China would be more aggressive, I think meeting US and Philippines (and Australia ?) would be good, and make joint statements and such. possible support Philippines claim and financially support presence in spratly.

Send a clear message, not a muddled one.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,066
Solutions
2
Reactions
94 22,487
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
China Made blatant disregard toward our Sovereign over North Natuna Sea
Solution is simple, deploy your ships ( a few boats, one-two large ships) at Natuna EEZ to repel chinese fisheries and Chinese CG if assisting them. It isn't like they are invading a piece of land or occupying your territorial waters, it is an EEZ and you are obliged to protect it, it may not be state-assisted illegal fisheries but also individual illegal fisheries might be doing operations in there.
 

Kafkaesque

Active member
Messages
26
Reactions
20
Nation of residence
Indonesia
For what? Look after Prabowo visit, not only China Made blatant disregard toward our Sovereign over North Natuna Sea, but not long after there is Covid19 case in which had happened in Wuhan!!! And now amid pandemic China keep increased their presence in South China Sea and using vacsine they are developing (in which i am quite suspicious on how they are able to complete Vacsine development in less than one year, meanwhile incubation process and selection of strain and sampling process should need much more longer time) China using Kungflu as biological weapons as diplomatic tools and coerce other to push their interest toward other countries.

Hmm.. Your reply kind of baffled me.. For the record I don't pro China, I don't pro US, I don't pro Russia, Australia, India, Saudi, Iran etc etc. I am pro Indonesia, a better Indonesia, means a better living for me.

Anyway.. If you are referring to us not being close to "US block", (you can add this to the record) I don't consider them as enemy, I simply think that Indonesia and them have some differences, that makes it hard to form an alliance between Indonesia and them.

I mean, even if somehow the government can convince the public to forget about the "bebas-aktif" thing in our constitution, do you think the US will just take us and give us all the fancy toys?

Or will they demand some changes before they give us F 35?

Don't get me wrong, I WOULD LOVE IT IF INDONESIA CHANGES TO BE MORE "WESTERN" !!

But lets be realistic, will such thing is possible in the near future? I don't think so. From moral, economy to things like military base.. Nope, not gonna happen. Not now.. it will take at least a decade / one generation before Indonesia's population reach that stage.

PS: Personally I'd take the moral and economic "changes" to some extent, but not the military base.
 
Last edited:

Logam42

Active member
Messages
29
Reactions
56
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Indonesia
For what? Look after Prabowo visit, not only China Made blatant disregard toward our Sovereign over North Natuna Sea, but not long after there is Covid19 case in which had happened in Wuhan!!! And now amid pandemic China keep increased their presence in South China Sea and using vacsine they are developing (in which i am quite suspicious on how they are able to complete Vacsine development in less than one year, meanwhile incubation process and selection of strain and sampling process should need much more longer time) China using Kungflu as biological weapons as diplomatic tools and coerce other to push their interest toward other countries.

Sometimes when I read the posts from the defense forum community, it really stands in contrast to what I hear from people I know in the diplomatic office as well as those I know who assist Indonesia in policy making.

While China is a bigger threat than America at this point of time, our 'bebas-aktif' is not delusional propaganda by our gov. It is a policy that allows us a degree of security without being under the sphere of power of either state. Our official neutrality also allows other ASEAN countries more wriggle room. We have cooperation with both China and America, and while we are not seen as an ally by either, we do receive benefits. GST Trade preference from America, participation in RIMPAC and many other defense cooperation, all while accepting belt & road money as well as Chinese investments in our IT sector.

In short, both sides have some interest in keeping us neutral. Even-though America understandably wants us to commit. What comes afterwards though? Trade disruption with China? Withdrawal of investments? Even more anti-Chinese domestic sentiment? Furthermore, it might prompt China to act more belligerently, causing the conflict to heat up quickly.

Shiny toys alone should not be enough for us to change our neutral stance, especially if it would lead to an economic disruption and an escalation of conflict.

Yes, China has leveraged its ability to control Covid early on to conduct Corona-diplomacy. Its also has continued to be belligerent on matters regarding the Natuna islands (and its border with India), as well as a rushed vaccine that we are now buying and producing.

Note though, that when it comes to direct medical assistance, China has done much better than America. Furthermore, it makes perfect sense that China would have a vaccine first as it was the first nation to deal with it. China instituted the largest lockdown in human history in late January. The West and the rest of world only started to really follow suite in mid march. Its easy to argue that China had a head start in preparing a vaccine.

Despite that, well, the UK has also started rollout of the Pfizer Vaccine, so arguably, China's 'rush' is not in any way different to the rush everyone else is doing. Furthermore, the Chinese Vaccine is also the most 'unsophisticated' since it simply uses 'inactivated' virus instead of the fancier techniques. As shown, it also has a lower efficacy, at about 90-92%, compared to the 95% of Pfizer vaccine. This is all public knowledge. It is not a conspiracy.

Furthermore, we have tested this very vaccine in stage 3 trials done by thousands in Indonesia, so we know that the vaccine is compatible with our local covid-19 strain and our genetics. Its a reasonable vaccine, it has been tested, and we are administering it to the young first, meaning that should there by any allergic reactions (bound to happen when administering to millions instead of just thousands) would be survivable.

Note that all the vaccines we've recieved so far are from China, because the western world is once again hoarding their vaccines. It makes more sense to cooperate with China, because China is the country that is most willing to cooperate and does not put us at the very bottom of their priority list.

As such, should we shift away from neutrality, its much more preferable to do it slowly. As currently, our cooperation with China brings a lot of benefits and the West is understandably only interested in Indonesia as a meat-shield. Should war break out, our neighborhood will be the most effected. To date, despite provocations, room increased for provocation is still high before we must commit to the West.
 

NEKO

Experienced member
Indonesia Correspondent
Messages
2,784
Reactions
3 2,316
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
The purchase of weapons to defend the sovereignty of a nation is an old song that is played every time the ministry of defense proposes an increase in its budget.
Yeah because bamboe runtjing will be enough to defend against missile attack, and destroy enemy ships and planes.
It is time the government realized that Indonesia's sovereignty is not threatened by external forces, but rather by government policies that ignore people's rights, for example in Papua.
Expansionist country in the north is not a threat?
biggest spender on defense is full of democracy countries like Japan, South Korea, UK, France , Australia and India
For the writer those country is authoritarian. Perhaps.
most willing
Its image building, to fix their reputation during this pandemic.
West is understandably only interested in Indonesia as a meat-shield
Couldn't agree more.
 

Indos

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,220
Reactions
1,541
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Sometimes when I read the posts from the defense forum community, it really stands in contrast to what I hear from people I know in the diplomatic office as well as those I know who assist Indonesia in policy making.

While China is a bigger threat than America at this point of time, our 'bebas-aktif' is not delusional propaganda by our gov. It is a policy that allows us a degree of security without being under the sphere of power of either state. Our official neutrality also allows other ASEAN countries more wriggle room. We have cooperation with both China and America, and while we are not seen as an ally by either, we do receive benefits. GST Trade preference from America, participation in RIMPAC and many other defense cooperation, all while accepting belt & road money as well as Chinese investments in our IT sector.

In short, both sides have some interest in keeping us neutral. Even-though America understandably wants us to commit. What comes afterwards though? Trade disruption with China? Withdrawal of investments? Even more anti-Chinese domestic sentiment? Furthermore, it might prompt China to act more belligerently, causing the conflict to heat up quickly.

Shiny toys alone should not be enough for us to change our neutral stance, especially if it would lead to an economic disruption and an escalation of conflict.

Yes, China has leveraged its ability to control Covid early on to conduct Corona-diplomacy. Its also has continued to be belligerent on matters regarding the Natuna islands (and its border with India), as well as a rushed vaccine that we are now buying and producing.

Note though, that when it comes to direct medical assistance, China has done much better than America. Furthermore, it makes perfect sense that China would have a vaccine first as it was the first nation to deal with it. China instituted the largest lockdown in human history in late January. The West and the rest of world only started to really follow suite in mid march. Its easy to argue that China had a head start in preparing a vaccine.

Despite that, well, the UK has also started rollout of the Pfizer Vaccine, so arguably, China's 'rush' is not in any way different to the rush everyone else is doing. Furthermore, the Chinese Vaccine is also the most 'unsophisticated' since it simply uses 'inactivated' virus instead of the fancier techniques. As shown, it also has a lower efficacy, at about 90-92%, compared to the 95% of Pfizer vaccine. This is all public knowledge. It is not a conspiracy.

Furthermore, we have tested this very vaccine in stage 3 trials done by thousands in Indonesia, so we know that the vaccine is compatible with our local covid-19 strain and our genetics. Its a reasonable vaccine, it has been tested, and we are administering it to the young first, meaning that should there by any allergic reactions (bound to happen when administering to millions instead of just thousands) would be survivable.

Note that all the vaccines we've recieved so far are from China, because the western world is once again hoarding their vaccines. It makes more sense to cooperate with China, because China is the country that is most willing to cooperate and does not put us at the very bottom of their priority list.

As such, should we shift away from neutrality, its much more preferable to do it slowly. As currently, our cooperation with China brings a lot of benefits and the West is understandably only interested in Indonesia as a meat-shield. Should war break out, our neighborhood will be the most effected. To date, despite provocations, room increased for provocation is still high before we must commit to the West.

Free and active policy actually is just implemented after the collapse of USSR. We are pretty much Western ally in the past and it includes the invasion into East Timor, sending special force and Brimob corps to Malaysia to combat their communist insurgent, helping Afghan in their war against USSR, freezing diplomatic and trade relation with China and Vietnam until 1990 (following the fall of Berlin wall (1989) and market system implementation in China and Vietnam), and helping Bosnian with ammunition during Soeharto visit to Sarajevo.

That moment is also not like Today, communism is not just about one country like China Today, but ideology that are followed by USSR, China, Vietnam, and others with the possibility to spread more. Our position at that time is understandable by looking to that situation.

Free and active policy is more viable and beneficial now and it is also more fit to be implemented after Indonesia economy reach 1 trillion USD with potential to grow even further for the next decades. Luckily the tension of US and China just become so clear during Trump administration when our economy has been relatively quite big.

I see the policy as starting point for Indonesia to become major power someday since it shows independency and pride. Smaller countries like Philippine, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam cannot afford this policy and they need to get some kind of shield from great power like USA or China to survive and strive.
 

NEKO

Experienced member
Indonesia Correspondent
Messages
2,784
Reactions
3 2,316
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
IMHO Vietnam doesn't need shield, what they need is a reliable arms supplier.
Like China during vietnam-us war, and right now its Russia.
 

Gundala

Well-known member
Messages
415
Reactions
1 506
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Sometimes when I read the posts from the defense forum community, it really stands in contrast to what I hear from people I know in the diplomatic office as well as those I know who assist Indonesia in policy making.

While China is a bigger threat than America at this point of time, our 'bebas-aktif' is not delusional propaganda by our gov. It is a policy that allows us a degree of security without being under the sphere of power of either state. Our official neutrality also allows other ASEAN countries more wriggle room. We have cooperation with both China and America, and while we are not seen as an ally by either, we do receive benefits. GST Trade preference from America, participation in RIMPAC and many other defense cooperation, all while accepting belt & road money as well as Chinese investments in our IT sector.

In short, both sides have some interest in keeping us neutral. Even-though America understandably wants us to commit. What comes afterwards though? Trade disruption with China? Withdrawal of investments? Even more anti-Chinese domestic sentiment? Furthermore, it might prompt China to act more belligerently, causing the conflict to heat up quickly.

Shiny toys alone should not be enough for us to change our neutral stance, especially if it would lead to an economic disruption and an escalation of conflict.

Yes, China has leveraged its ability to control Covid early on to conduct Corona-diplomacy. Its also has continued to be belligerent on matters regarding the Natuna islands (and its border with India), as well as a rushed vaccine that we are now buying and producing.

Note though, that when it comes to direct medical assistance, China has done much better than America. Furthermore, it makes perfect sense that China would have a vaccine first as it was the first nation to deal with it. China instituted the largest lockdown in human history in late January. The West and the rest of world only started to really follow suite in mid march. Its easy to argue that China had a head start in preparing a vaccine.

Despite that, well, the UK has also started rollout of the Pfizer Vaccine, so arguably, China's 'rush' is not in any way different to the rush everyone else is doing. Furthermore, the Chinese Vaccine is also the most 'unsophisticated' since it simply uses 'inactivated' virus instead of the fancier techniques. As shown, it also has a lower efficacy, at about 90-92%, compared to the 95% of Pfizer vaccine. This is all public knowledge. It is not a conspiracy.

Furthermore, we have tested this very vaccine in stage 3 trials done by thousands in Indonesia, so we know that the vaccine is compatible with our local covid-19 strain and our genetics. Its a reasonable vaccine, it has been tested, and we are administering it to the young first, meaning that should there by any allergic reactions (bound to happen when administering to millions instead of just thousands) would be survivable.

Note that all the vaccines we've recieved so far are from China, because the western world is once again hoarding their vaccines. It makes more sense to cooperate with China, because China is the country that is most willing to cooperate and does not put us at the very bottom of their priority list.

As such, should we shift away from neutrality, its much more preferable to do it slowly. As currently, our cooperation with China brings a lot of benefits and the West is understandably only interested in Indonesia as a meat-shield. Should war break out, our neighborhood will be the most effected. To date, despite provocations, room increased for provocation is still high before we must commit to the West.
I do agree, but we also must consider the disadvantage of getting too close to China. That is they are not a reliable partner. They help and "stab" at the same time with their bully in a form that sometime we wont be able to see, only certain govt ranking official can see it. Im not saying US didnt do the same thing (more or less in different kind of way) but US is more reliable and predictable then China as of now.

There is this other side of argument which said that if you look at the history of emerging market countries who decided to be a reliable partner to the west their economy shine more compare to those who didnt. Well it has some truth in it until the recent "America first" kicked in. But that doesnt change the fact if one country get close enough it will be easier to get technology transfer, high tech research sharing, market opening, etc, which in the end help leap those countries to graduate into higher income country.

Now our own "bebas aktif" enable us to move more freely between super power but the downside is we never get too close to them like their old ally in the region even in Soeharto era. But chin up! it will change in the next decade if we can pull out of this pandemic. If we manage to grow our economy steadily and starting to build of defense more seriously then we would become the buffer or the balancer of the region. It can bring great benefit to our country or if we are unable to play it smoothly can be a disaster and being a prey of 2 dominant world force :LOL:
 

trishna_amrta

Experienced member
Messages
1,606
Reactions
1,925
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
it might prompt China to act more belligerently, causing the conflict to heat up quickly.

Shiny toys alone should not be enough for us to change our neutral stance, especially if it would lead to an economic disruption and an escalation of conflict.
China has been intruding our EEZ since before 2016. That imply with or without further ties with the US or up arming our own military is in any way escalating the situation, because its already escalating by itself
 

Logam42

Active member
Messages
29
Reactions
56
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Indonesia
China has been intruding our EEZ since before 2016. That imply with or without further ties with the US or up arming our own military is in any way escalating the situation, because its already escalating by itself
Thats actually my point. When we are neutral, hostilities ramp up slowly. That will not be the case if we are a confirmed American proxy.

I'm not advocating being neutral to the point of giving up territory as appeasement, merely that right now, the occasional probing in Natuna is still well worth the hassle of being neutral. If anything, taking a side is more untenable since America and the EU sure as hell won't be giving us any economic support worth a damn.
I do agree, but we also must consider the disadvantage of getting too close to China. That is they are not a reliable partner. They help and "stab" at the same time with their bully in a form that sometime we wont be able to see, only certain govt ranking official can see it. Im not saying US didnt do the same thing (more or less in different kind of way) but US is more reliable and predictable then China as of now.

There is this other side of argument which said that if you look at the history of emerging market countries who decided to be a reliable partner to the west their economy shine more compare to those who didnt. Well it has some truth in it until the recent "America first" kicked in. But that doesnt change the fact if one country get close enough it will be easier to get technology transfer, high tech research sharing, market opening, etc, which in the end help leap those countries to graduate into higher income country.

Now our own "bebas aktif" enable us to move more freely between super power but the downside is we never get too close to them like their old ally in the region even in Soeharto era. But chin up! it will change in the next decade if we can pull out of this pandemic. If we manage to grow our economy steadily and starting to build of defense more seriously then we would become the buffer or the balancer of the region. It can bring great benefit to our country or if we are unable to play it smoothly can be a disaster and being a prey of 2 dominant world force :LOL:
One main difference with the 1960s is that right now, everyone in Indonesia hates the Chinese and communism is a taboo word.

There is no 'third largest communist party in the world' to act as a possible 5th pillar if hostilities erupt. Yes, there are a bunch of Islamists, but in all due honesty their threat is contained.

As for "The West Being Sugar Daddy No.1"... well as we are right now, even if we pivot, they will not trust us with any of this technology. The largest ToT we have to date is with Turkey and South Korea. Europe and America have been unwilling to give even the smallest of pieces of tech. What are the chances that we take a side only to be treated the same way as the EU treated Turkey?

Furthermore, we already have favourable access to US markets though the GSP, as for Europe, allies or no, they're gonna clamp down on our palm oils. If anything, such behavior will worsen once we pick a side since they no we have no other option.

Everyone assumes that if we become 'pro-west' we'll be treated like South Korea, Taiwan, or Japan. In reality, we would probably be treated like India, Afghanistan, or Turkey. Given old toys and told to bleed and die for their interests. Unlike with Japan and South Korea, America no longer cleans up their messes, no longer has a 'marshall plan' fund to sponsor reconstruction. Iraq and Afghanistan became battlefields 2 decades ago and they are still violent, unstable, tragic backwaters.

Hence why despite knowing that dependency on China isn't good either, I say our current position is good enough, we have a lot to lose by relinquishing neutrality.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom