Present and Future of defence mechanism

First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the China government for organizing this important Seminar on “Present and future of Defense Regional mechanism”.
My presentation will cover background, present defense and security regional mechanism, future defense and security regional mechanism, and conclusion.
Background
The end of the Cold War did not automatically bring peace and stability in the Asia Pacific region. Although major wars have no longer occurred, new threats and challenges have emerged. The increasing activities of transnational organized crime which include drug smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering as well as the escalating of international terrorism have replaced the traditional security threat of territorial conflict between neighboring countries. Furthermore, threats to human security such as pandemic diseases and natural disaster have caused major problem for countries in the region. There was also a shift in geopolitical paradigm, where the focus on political and economic activities have moved from the West (Europe and North America) to the East (East and Southeast Asia), The increasing economic growth of some countries in the region certainly is a conflict potential among those countries in the tight competition for market as well as raw material resources.
Being part of the Asia Pacific community, Indonesia is certainly concern with the security issues in this region. As one of the initiators of ASEAN Regional Forum Indonesia has played active role in creating peace and stability in the region. This paper would present the Indonesian perspective on the Future of Defense And Security Regional Mechanism especially in the Asia Pasific Region.

Present Defense And Security Regional Mechanism
Present Regional Defense and Security Cooperation
In considering security mechanisms in the Asia-Pacific region, two criteria are needed. One is the problem of legitimacy and the other is the problem of effectiveness. The important criteria for determining legitimacy is whether a UN Security Council resolution exists. Two elements can be specified for the criteria used to determine effectiveness. One element is who is involved. In the case of the Northeast Asian sub-region, one key point is how to get great power China to participate. At the other extreme, there is the danger of losing effectiveness if the group has become too large. The other element is wether the mechanism possesses an effective method of resolving problems. In other words, it stops at the level of mere security dialogue, or it has a real method of resolving problems.
Following the withdrawl of US military forces in Southeast Asia toward the end of the Cold War, it could be said there was a vaccum in the security of the region. However, there is a lack of enthusiasm for collective security mechanisms in this region as it was feared that such a mechanism may intrude on state sovereignty. Hence, apart from bilateral defense and security cooperation among countries in the region, since 1994 the defense and security mechanism in this region is the Asean Regional Forum (ARF). It is a consultative Asia-Pacific Forum initiated by ASEAN to foster constructive dialogue and consultation on political and security issues of common interest and concern; and to make significant contributions to efforts towards confidence-building and preventive diplomacy in the Asia-Pacific region. The current participants in the ARF are Australia, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Canada, China, European Union, India, Indonesia, Japan, Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea, Republic of Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Mongolia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Russian Federation, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, East Timor, United States, and Vietnam.
Although it is only a consultative Forum, in the past few years ARF has been quite successful in formulating concepts for regional security cooperation within the context of Confidence Building Measures and Preventive Diplomacy including the formation of an advisory board in times of emergency and threats to regional peace and stability. Cooperation among members in combating non-traditional threats is mainly in the form of exchanging intelligence information, training and joint exercise, both bilaterally between 2 country members and multilaterally.
Current Regional Challenges
Current challenges in this region among others are the following:
Transnational violent extremism that promotes disorder, disrupts stability, and opposes freedom.,
State and non state actors that sponsor terrorism, pursue nuclear technologies, proliferate weapons, and support illicit and criminal behaviors.,
Developing nations experiencing rapid economic activity to include drug trafficking, trafficking in persons, and piracy.,
Humanitarian crises such as pandemic, famine or drought
Natural disasters like tsunamis, earth quakes, volcanoes, typhoons and cyclones.,
Territorial disputes.,
Poor environmental stewardship and resource management, pillaging of shared resources, and disputes over resource sovereignty.
Lessons Learned From Present Defense and Security Cooperation
In the current format, ARF has been criticized as incapable to deal with the changing security threats and conflicts in the volatile Asia-Pacific region. The 6th ARF Policy Conference in Thailand in 2009 recognized the complex nature of the non-traditional threats and thus urged the defense and security sectors to undertake a wide range of activities to cope with these threats. But the lack of operational authority inhibits the Forum to immediately response to a threat or a security challenge. Hence, a doable mechanism is required to implement the concepts or policies formulated by ARF.
In addition, many scholars have also noted that the root of terrorism is injustice, both in terms of political and ideological aspirations as well as social-economical conditions. Terrorism could be categorized into 3 types, namely violent separatism, Islamic radicalism and ferocious communal conflict. Consequently, there is a necessity to address those issues as preventive measures against the growth of radicalism, including formulation of non-discriminatory domestic policies and reasonable foreign policies. Since Indonesia has experienced all types of terrorism as mentioned above, it could share its experience to other members of the Forum in order to develop a reasonable solution in addressing this issue.
Global Peace Operations Initiative
The Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI) is managed by the Office of Plans, Policy, and Analysis in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State and acknowledged by the UN. The GPOI addresses major gaps in international peace operations support. The program aims to build and maintain capability, capacity, and effectiveness of peace operations. The Global Peace Operations Initiative was established after the 2004 G8 Sea Island Summit to address growing gaps in international peace operations. The goals of GPOI expand upon the goals of the Sea Island Action Plan. GPOI built policy based on previous peace operations capacity-building programs.
Objectives and Activities
Train and Equip: Train and, as appropriate, equip at least 75,000 peacekeepers worldwide, with an emphasis on Africa, to increase global capacity to participate in peace operations.
Regional and Institutional Capacity Building: Enhance the capacity of regional and sub-regional organizations to train for, plan, prepare for, manage, conduct, and obtain and sustain lessons-learned from peace operations by providing technical assistance, training, and material support; and, support institutions and activities which offer these capabilities to a regional audience.

Clearinghouse Activities: Create a "clearinghouse" function to exchange information and coordinate G8 efforts to enhance peace operations training and exercises in Africa; continue to provide support for such clearinghouse initiatives throughout the life of the G8's Action Plan for Expanding Global Capability for Peace Support Operations.
Transportation and Logistics Support Arrangement: Work with other G8 members to develop a globally oriented transportation and logistics support arrangement to help provide transportation for deploying peacekeepers and logistics support to sustain units in the field.
Deployment Equipment: Develop a cached equipment program to procure and warehouse equipment for use in peace operations anywhere around the globe.
Stability Police: Provide support to the international Center of Excellence for Stability Police Units (COESPU) in Italy to increase the capabilities and interoperability of stability police to participate in peace operations.
Sustainment and Self Sufficiency: Conduct sustainment/self-sufficiency activities in support of the objectives above with a focus on assisting partners to sustain proficiencies gained in training programs. (Note: Owing to its importance, sustainment/self-sufficiency is addressed in the strategy as both and objective and an overarching implementing principle for all objectives.)
All objectives support the building and maintenance capability, capacity, and effectiveness to plan and execute peace support operations. The exercise has been conducted in turn, in Mongolia (Khan Quest Ex/2007), Bangladesh (Shanti Dooth Ex/2008), Indonesia (Garuda Shield Ex/2009). The next exercise will be held in Cambodia.
Although Indonesia has ample experience in Peacekeeping Operations since the 1950s, advance training and equipment up-grading would certainly beneficial to keep up with the new challenges in peacekeeping operations worldwide. On the other hand, other members could learn the method used by the Indonesian contingent to win the heart and mind of the conflicting parties which has made the missions successful.
Future Defense And Security Regional Mechanism
Strengthening GPOI
As major wars between states have diminished in the past few years, many conflicts occurred were intra-state in nature, either in the form of separatism, insurgency or communal/horizontal conflicts. Thus, the GPOI strategy should be adjusted accordingly. Training of trainer programs such as understanding local culture and geographic condition should become priority as the need for well trained peacekeepers in facing contingency might be increasing.
One of the most important issues in GPOI is only some countries want to participate in this exercise. Actually, GPOI is a first step to enhance cooperation and collaboration among peacekeepers. Perhaps the United Nations Organization could play a greater role in this program since the cost of this program might become a burden for G-8 countries and convince more countries to participate in this program. Besides, most of the peacekeeping operations were carried out under the UN flag anyway.
Being the major player in this region, It is expected that China could contribute to this program in order to strengthen GPOI program through sharing information and experience, and direct participation.
Global Disaster Relief Operation Initiative (GDROI)
Following the success of the Global Peace Operations Initiative, in my opinion the future regional defense and security mechanism might be the Global Disaster Relief Operation Initiative (GDROI). Being vurnerable to natural disasters (earthquake, volcanic eruption, flood and tsunami), Indonesia would propose this initiative. The tsunami disaster in Aceh in December 2004 showed that the role of the military in disaster relief was crucial, both in the field of Search and Rescue as well as the distribution of aids in remote areas by air (using helicopters and fixed wings aircraft) and sea (using Landing Platform Deck/LPD). The involvement of foreign military forces from friendly countries certainly helped the disaster relief efforts as they brought the necessary expertise, manpower and equipment.
Parallel to the concept of human security and the concept of Military Operations Other Than War, Global Disaster Relief Operation Initiative would contribute to the peace and stability of the region. Again, the United Nations Organization and its organs (UNICEF, WHO, UNHCR and UNDP) could play a greater role in this program as coordinator as well as Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) as participants to supervise and manage the disaster relief operations in the affected countries. The program might include training in disaster relief management such as disaster prevention measures, flood control, early warning measures as well as disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction.
Conclusion
The changing threats and challenges for peace and stability in the region require adjustment in our way of thinking. It should be noted that traditional and non-traditional threats are often intertwined. With respect to peace and stability in the region, some of the problems could not be solved militarily. Any security cooperation in this region should be within the context of Confidence Building Measures and Preventive Diplomacy concepts. Therefore, there is the necessity of more comprehensive mechanism including formulation of just policies in dealing with the social, political and economic issues which directly or indirectly related to the peace and stability in all countries in the region.