Indonesian Sea Power and Regional Maritime Security Challenges

*Marsetio Marsetio  -  Hang Tuah University, Indonesia
Received: 22 Jul 2017; Published: 23 Jul 2017.
Open Access License URL:

Citation Format:
Article Info
Section: Articles
Language: EN
Statistics: 1044 548

The main objective of this paper is to examine the regional maritime security challenges facing Indonesia. As it is known that entering to the 21st century has come a new term in regional architecture in the Asia-Pacific region, namely the Indo-Pacific region. This region consists of the Indian Ocean and Pacific. Both of these areas became more interconnected than in the previous period. These two regions became a single, significant system in the global order. Key players in the Indo-Pacific region are China, India and the United States. Of course, their actions have created new challenges in maritime security. These challenges include maritime disputes, pirates, and maritime power competition. The dispute in the South China Sea has spawned a security problem in the Asia Pacific region that Indonesia must face in the future.

Keywords: Indonesian sea power, maritime security, piracy, maritime border conflict, maritime nation.

Article Metrics:

  1. Batongbacal, Jay. “Arbitration 101: Philippine V. China.” Accessed 1 January 2015.
  2. Calvo, Alex. “South China Sea: International arbitration moves forward as PAC rules on jurisdiction.” 6 November 2015, retrieved from
  3. Cordesman, Anthony H. and Abdullah Toukan. “The Indian Ocean Region: A Strategic Net Assessment.“ Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Working Paper, 2014.
  4. Cordner, Lee. “Progressing Maritime Security Cooperation in the Indian Ocean.“ Naval War College Review 64, 4 (2011): 68-88.
  5. Eleanor Albert, “Competition in the Indian Ocean”, CFR Backgrounders, 23 November 2015, accessed 17 February 2013.
  6. Glaser, Bonnie S. “Armed Clash in the South China Sea.” Contingency Planning Memorandum No. 14, Council on Foreign Relations Press, April 2012. Retrieved from
  7. ________. “China’s Island Building in the Spratly Islands: For What Purpose?”, in Examining the South China Sea, edited Murray Hiebert, Phuong Nguyen and Gregory B. Poling. CSIS, 2015.
  8. Grahan, Euan and Tim Huxley. “The US-Singapore enhanced defence agreement: A third upgrade for bilateral collaboration.”Accessed 10 December 2015.
  9. Hall, D. G. E. A History of Southeast Asia. Fourth Edition. London: Macmillan, 1981.
  10. Lea, Catherine. “India’s extending naval horizons and partnerships” in Euan Graham & Henrick Z. Tsjeng Ed. Navigating the Indo-Pacific Arc. RSIS Monograph No.32, November 2014.
  11. Markey, Daniel S. “Armed Confrontation Between China and India, Contingency Planning,” Memorandum No. 27, Council on Foreign Relations Press, November 2015, retrieved from
  12. Marsetio. A World Class Indonesian Navy: The New Paradigm, Second Edition. Jakarta: Indonesian Navy Headquarters, 2014.
  13. ________. Indonesian Sea Power, Second Edition (Bogor: Indonesian Defence University Press, 2014.
  14. Potgieter. “Thean, Maritime Security in the Indian Ocean: Strategic Setting and Features.” Institute for Security Studies Paper. August 2012, No. 236.
  15. Scott, David. “The “Indo-Pacific”: New Regional Formulations and New Maritime Frameworks for US-India Strategic Convergence.” Asia Pacific Review 19, 2 (2012): 85-109.
  16. Singh, Amit, “South China Sea Dispute: Regional Issue, Global Concern, Maritime Affairs.” Journal of the National Maritime Foundation of India 8, 1 (2012): 117-118.
  17. Till, Gill. Seapower: A Guide for the Twenty-First Century. Third Edition. London: Routledge, 2013.
  18. Tupaz, Edsel and Danie Wagner. “China should be concerned about the Hague Tribunal.” The Jakarta Post, 3 November 2015. Retrieved from /news/2015/11/03/china-should-be-concerned-about-the-hague tribunal.html#sthash.Vq W2C2j8.dpuf.
  19. Van der Putten, “Geopolitics and Maritime Security in the Indian Ocean: What Role for the European Union?.” Clingendael Institute Policy Brief, August 2014.
  21. Permanent Court of Arbitration Case View, see
  22. ng?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term= Autofeed&link_time=1449730429#xtor=CS1-10