|
3. Pursuing the "Maritime Freedom" --- Toward securing the comprehensive security of SLOC
(1) General situation
(i) Security issues of the future
The economic growth in the integrated region continues to be strong except for a brief period of the currency crisis in late 1990's. Although the effects of the currency crisis still linger in some countries of South-East Asia and South West Asia, even these countries will undoubtedly continue their steady growth in the future. Therefore the future issues of this region will be the problems necessarily faced by any regional countries at the stage of rapid economic growth, such as China. These issues include: to secure necessary energy and resource to maintain economic growth; rapid population increase resulted from economic affluence earned by economic growth, and securing of food to feed them; and the measures to address the adverse global environmental effects arisen in the process of, and as a result of, economic development. Even in developed countries, which have already addressed these issues, there will be a need to adopt new and effective measures for allowing the participation of additional countries.
For these issues, if countries can unitedly take necessary measures, then the problems will not rise, but, in reality, to address these issues is not that easy either politically or technologically. Rather, each country will likely consider their national interests first, and try to develop and adopt necessary measures to protect them. This may lead to the rise of new confrontation between neighboring countries or in the region as a whole, generating an unstable situation in regional security. As mentioned before, especially about the oceans within the region, many have high expectations on oceans concerning the solution of issues, such as the securing of energy, resource, and foods, and the measures to address global environmental effects, but the oceans, on the other hand can become a stage of intricate tangle of national intentions. That is the very reason why it is urgently needed to build a regional consensus over "the use of oceans."
(ii) Security Framework in Indi-Asia & West-Pacific integrated region
As the efforts of multilateral dialogue to discuss political and security issues covering the East-Asia & West-Pacific region, there are some functions such as ARF for example, but ASEAN, with no interference in domestic matters being a pillar of their principles, has been extremely cautious to get involved in the issues of the security field beyond the framework of voluntary multilateral cooperation, whether in or out of ARF. The ARF has been developed to a forum of 23 countries and regions today from the original 17 countries and regions, with the Ministerial Meetings held every year since 1994, and North Korea started to participate in the Ministerial Meetings from 2000. In 2003, there have been the movements to strengthen ARF activities further such as the emphasis on the importance of advancing ARF process to the higher level of "preventive diplomacy," and Chinese proposal to host "ARF Security Policy Meeting."
Nevertheless, the need to build a new multinational security framework is the issue to be addressed for the future. In May 2003, "Asia Security Conference" was held in Singapore by private research institutes, but no multinational security framework to cover Indi-Asia & West-Pacific integrated region exists today. Especially North East Asia region has unstable and uncertain security environment, since the region has a cluster of major countries, has experienced the history of being at the frontline of East-West confrontation during the Cold War, and still holds the issues such as South-North Korea and China-Taiwan relationship, as discussed before. Therefore, each country pursues the security policies independently, and what maintained the delicate balance of regional security and in fact played a significant role to stabilize this region could be said as the presence of US military forces based on the solid bilateral military alliances with US in the center, such as Japan-US and US-Korea alliances.
How the security framework of the integrated region will proceed in the future can be the topic of various debates, but there seems to be two distinct thoughts that grasp the unique features of this region. One is to further develop ARF, and to create "cooperative" multilateral security framework covering North East Asia and South West Asia, with some enforcement authority, but without presuming any exercise of military power, and to let that framework coexist with bilateral military alliances centered around US. Another thought is that, as long as the Cold War regime has ended, the regional countries are to resolve bilateral alliances phase by phase or mitigate alliance relationships and then create a "binding" security structure with a certain degree of enforcement authority covering the multilateral region including US.
In reality, the latter is an ideal image of security structure but has less chance of feasibility. It only means a desirable way of the future. Practically, the region is likely to pursue the former way, with various approaches possible. In terms of approaches, the major issue of the future will be how ARF will depart from current "coordination" first policy and adopt a certain degree of "mandating" enforcement system, and how the roles of bilateral military alliances centered around US will be distributed, then.
Nonetheless, the importance of the "Maritime Freedom" in Indi-Asia & West-Pacific integrated region will become apparent in many different ways in the future, as described before, and the issues will undoubtedly have the potentials to instabilize the regional security. Therefore, there will likely be the rise of needs, sooner or later, to create a multilateral regional organization, which cover the entire region, provide the forum to discuss these issues regularly, and continuously, and has the authority to impose enforcement measures, if necessary.
(2) Regional coordination for "Maritime Freedom" - realization of "Maritime Coalition" and the role of major maritime players
(i) Responsibility of Japan for the securing of "Maritime Freedom" in the integrated region
The long term national goal for Japan in 21st century could be summarized as follows: "to become a nation that takes responsibility appropriate to its national power in every aspect, as the essential existence in the security and prosperity of the region and the world, while ensuring own national security and economic prosperity with identity unique to Japan."
In order to achieve this target, Japan needs to overcome several problems, as described in the so-called manifests of Liberal Democratic Party or Democratic Party. To enumerate them for example: financial reform (appropriation of national fiscal base, and maintenance of stable and favorable economic conditions); industrial restructuring (IT revolution); educational reform (views of a nation and the values of ethics); pursuance of independent and strategic policies in diplomacy constitutional revision (recognition of national defense forces, and exercise of collective defense right), etc.
Various approaches are possible as a way for Japan to overcome these issues, and to achieve long-term national goal. Before implementing such approaches, however, it is necessary to satisfy several preconditions such as: the presence of strong political leadership based on competitive but stable political structure; awareness of responsibilities as a nation with influential power over international community; willingness to provide independent and concrete contribution in the efforts to ensure the security of the region as a whole, etc.
Finally, in terms of concrete contribution listed as the last precondition, what is important is how Japan can take the responsibility in securing the "Maritime Freedom," which is essential for the coordinated development of the region and Japan, and has two significant meanings of the reliable SLOC to go through the integrated region, and of the security of stable resource supply source.
(ii) The role Japan must take for the "Maritime Coalition" of the integrated region and the presence of US naval power
The "Maritime Freedom" of the region cannot be secured by the efforts of a single country. It can be fulfilled only by mutual understanding and cooperation of regional countries (including the countries of neighboring regions in case of SLOC). For this, regional countries need to start from sharing the same views on the regional benefits provided by the regional "Maritime Freedom". Undoubtedly, this is not an easy task for any country, but, if regional countries look into the future of the region as a whole and of each nation, it will not be impossible to share the consensus on the needs of such views. Even UN's Convention on the Law of the Sea took 9 years of discussion ever since the 3rd Ocean Law Conference of 1973, before adopting the convention in 1982 at last, and then took another 12 years to enter into force in 1994.
In the case of building such consensus, Japan needs to take an initiative in this integrated region, with patience and determination. This is because Japan among regional countries is the nation most dependent on the "Maritime Freedom" for its very existence and foundation of prosperity. Also because other regional countries, if not all, earn considerable benefits from mutually dependent relationship with Japan through oceanic ties, in some way. Certainly, Japan is geopolitically situated in an important position to secure the safety of SLOC that runs through the integrated region.
Japan is considered to be nearing to earn the seat of a permanent member of the UN Security Council, and if that happens, then it will be able to represent the security intention of this region at the floor of the United Nations. Already, Japan has taken some role at G 7 (8) as a sole "representative" of Asian Country in the fields of politics, economy, and security. In other words, Japan already has established a solid base for taking the initiative of this issue in this region.
"Maritime Freedom" will eventually lead to the security issue. Therefore, for both "Freedom of Maritime Navigation" and "Freedom of Maritime Activities," it will be necessary in the end to recognize these issues as the part of regional security issues, and to let individual nations adopt measures. As stated before, however, it will be difficult to create so-called "binding" style framework in the integrated region, at least for foreseeable feature. Therefore, it may be necessary, for the moment, to proceed with the process where: start from the creation of "Maritime Freedom" dialogue group of "voluntary alliance" with "coordinating" structure like ARF, which is unique to this region; then gradually develop it into more effective forum of discussion participated by every relevant county in the integrated region. At such forum, it may be necessary to take an approach in which consensus will be built for the common security issues of the region such as economic issues, international terrorism, and pirate controls at first, while excluding any political feature as much as possible. The next stage will be to consider which method will enable regional countries to comply with the consensus building efforts. And lastly it is to address the measures for imposing certain "obligations" to regional countries. During these processes, Japan may need to take an initiative toward other interested countries, and help establishing the "Maritime Coalition" of the integrated region.
For such approach, it is undoubtedly necessary to always consider the relationship with US. Like it or not, it is a fact that the presence of US forces has stabilized the integrated region, and especially "Maritime Freedom" is inseparable with the overwhelmingly dominant presence of US Naval forces in the region. There are some speculations that US will reorganize the forces deployed to the front in the integrated region as a part of their efforts to transform US forces, but, for the foreseeable future at least, there will not likely be any fundamental changes in the significance of US Navy presence in the region. Actually, by continuously ensuring the "Maritime Freedom" of the integrated region, especially "Freedom of Maritime Navigation," the presence of US Naval forces has been maintained in the integrated region. The importance of such efforts will not diminish but rather increase in the future. Nevertheless, in the discussion of these issues, we need to be fully aware that any discussion without considering the presence of US Navy will be meaningless.
(iii) Expected role of India in the Maritime Coalition of the integrated region
India has over billion population and immense land area, while situated in an important geopolitical position for securing the safety of SLOC, which passes through the integrated region. It is the country with immense power to influence over the South West Asian region. In addition, it has raised its position in international economy with the recent development of information and communication technologies (IT).
India sets its national security goals as the sustenance of minimum deterrence power against the threat of weapons of mass destruction, in addition to the defense of own nation, and the protection of its peoples' lives and assets. According to the National Defense Report (Annual Report) of India, their nuclear policies are to maintain the minimum and reliable nuclear deterrence power as well as the policy of no preemptive use of nuclear weapons, and to continue the moratorium (temporary halt) on nuclear tests.
Indian Navy possess two fleets with about 150 ships and about 336 thousand displacement tonnage, and owns one aircraft carrier ("Viraat (ex-Hermes)", to be retired in 2010 according to Jane's Fighting Ship), and plans to build one new domestically made aircraft carrier, and is said to consider the purchase of a retired aircraft carrier "Admiral Gorshkov (ex-Baku)" from Russia after renovations. In addition, Indian Navy has undergone reorganization in response to Chinese moves toward reinforcing naval forces, which extended to the Indian Ocean, and established Far East Naval Force Command at the Nicobar Islands of the Andaman Sea in April 1998. In May 2001, a proposal was made on the new national security system and based on this India created, for the first time, a Joint Command (Andaman-Nicobar Command) to control Army, Navy, and Air Force, and the system of Chief of Staffs and Integrated Information Organization have been newly introduced.
Even now, India has confrontational relationship with Pakistan, over various issues including the jurisdiction of Kashmir, having three massive armed clashes in the past.
With China, on the other hand, India is attempting to improve the relationships, despite the national border issue with China, while showing cautiousness over nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles of China. In May 2000, Indian President Narayanan visited China, the President of All Peoples Congress Li Peng visited India in January 2001 and met with the Prime Minister Vajpayee, and the Prime Minister Zhu Rongi visited India in January 2002. Furthermore, in 2003, after the Defense Minister Fernandes's visit to China, Prime Minister Vajpayee visited China at the end of June for the first time in 10 years as the prime minister of India, and signed the "Declaration for the Bilateral Relationship and Comprehensive Cooperation" with the Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, which included the expanded military exchanges between two countries. As seen here, India-China relationship is advancing.
In regards to Russia, with which India used to maintain friendly relationship from the past, it strengthened the relationship by the signing of "Strategic Partnership Declaration" in October 2000. In December 2002, both countries signed "Delhi Joint Declaration on the Further Strengthening of Strategic Partnership" to reconfirm their strategic cooperative relationship and then Defense Minister Fernandes visited Russia in January 2003.
In regards to India-US relationship, there has been the period of cooled down relationship after the nuclear test of India in 1998, but since the inauguration of current Bush Administration some progress has been made. After US lifted economic sanction against India, both countries signed US-India Joint Declaration at the time of Prime Minister Vajpayee's visit to US in November 2001, which confirmed that both countries would change their relationship in quality. In addition, there has been a move to resume dialogue between them in the security field.
From April till September 2002, US and Indian Navies participated in the joint patrol of the Strait of Malacca, and from end of September till early October of the same year; both navy forces had joint exercise in Indian territory. Also, they did the same US-Indian joint military exercise in Alaska from the end of September till early October, demonstrating the active exchanges between their military forces.
The relationship between Japan and India has been friendly through their histories, although temporarily cooled down after India had nuclear test in 1998. Considering the strategic importance and potential power of India, Japan proceeds with a policy to improve and strengthen the relationship with India. When former Prime Minister Mori visited India in August 2001, Japanese and Indian leaders agreed to build a "Japan-India Global Partnership for 21st century" and during Prime Ministers Vajpayee and Koizumi talks in December 2001, both leaders announced the "Japan-India Joint Declaration." In this Declaration, both countries agreed to strengthen cooperative relationship in defense field, recognized the importance of cooperation in securing the safety of international Maritime Coalition, and confirm the importance of cooperation between coast guards and relevant authorities in controlling pirates and in conducting search and rescue operations.
More recently, Japan-India Defense Summit in May 2003 had seen Indian side presented a proposal for mutual cooperation to secure SLOC in the Indian Ocean, including the joint training exercise between Japanese and Indian navies as the efforts to control piracy, the mutual exchange visits by the naval fleets of both countries, the personnel exchanges, the dispatch of trainees, and the joint ASW simulation.
In Japan-India relationship, there are not many confrontational factors in the securing of "Maritime Freedom" and as a partner for securing "Maritime Freedom" in the integrated region; India is considered to be a suitable counterpart for Japan. Both countries share common concerns especially on the advancement of China in oceanic interests, and to secure the safety of economic and military transport on oceans at SLOC, which passes through the integrated region has extreme significance for both countries. In addition, the securing of "Freedom for Maritime Activities" in their exclusive economic zones will provide mutual benefits to the economic activities of both countries.
India's recent efforts to improve and strengthen the relationship with US will provide a favorable environment for the strengthening of Japan-India relationship for the securing of "Maritime Freedom." Nevertheless, the SLOC security in the integrated region will not be made possible with the efforts of only two countries of Japan and India. However, we should not forget such security is not possible without the coordination with US, especially with US Navy.
On the other hand, ASEAN countries, which are historically cautious of India's advancement, and South Korea, which is getting out of US's influence in recent years and trying to show independent features in their national security, have difficulty in finding any grounds to oppose the moves, if explained as the moves to monitor oceans for weapons of mass destruction trafficking and to address regional coalition to fight against international terrorism and piracy. They may be expected even to participate in the alliance of interested parties for "Maritime Coalition" led by Japan, US and India. China and Russia may show strong cautiousness for such a move led by US, but the phrase of "measures of international cooperation against international terrorism" will work effective in this case also.
(2) Securing the SLOCs through regional "Maritime Coalition"
(i) Peacetime Maritime Coalition --- Maintaining maritime law and order, and cooperating for humanitarian measures
As mentioned before, international terrorists and organized pirates are active mainly at the straits and island waters, so major SLOC is narrowed over those waters in South East Asia, imposing threats even from the peacetime. The issue of law and order in these waters is not only the problem of coastal countries, but also every regional country, which is benefited from SLOC passing through the integrated region. In addition, these international terrorists have for certain, and even pirates are considered to have dark connections with international organized crime syndicates and terrorists. So, regional cooperation is essential for regulating these groups.
In other words, the issue of maritime law and order links to the maritime security issues of the region as a whole as well as of individual countries, and it will be necessary for these regional countries to share consensus on the importance of maritime law and order from the peacetime, and adopt necessary measures of cooperation and coordination. First, it will be necessary to create regional and multinational frameworks for this purpose.
With late Prime Minister Obuchi's strong request, Japan is taking an initiative in piracy issues, but the focal point of their efforts is taken only by the Japanese Coast Guard, and is not fully responding to the delicate problems of building relationships with other naval forces. As the piracy issue involves some aspects of sovereign right over territorial waters, so the issue of some differences in the postures of interested parties should not be overlooked. Therefore, it will be necessary to review the possibility of creating a forum of "Peacetime Maritime Coalition" to discuss comprehensively various issues, including maritime rescues, responses for large scale natural disasters, and humanitarian issues such as the evacuation of foreigners when domestic security deteriorates, in addition to the issue of maritime law and order sustenance, based on the wider recognition that the issue of maritime law and order is the issue of securing "Freedom of Maritime Navigation" in peacetime.
As the approaches for this respect, following steps seems to constitute a wise move: first, start dialogues and concrete actions in bilateral relationships of Japan-India, US-India, and Japan-US among three countries of Japan, US and India; next, establish stationary discussion forum for "Maritime Coalition" among Japan, US and India; then introduce concrete actions over international waters, so to be less offending to other nations; then gradually develop actions such as fight against international terrorism and piracy in the Strait of Malacca, and some regional PSI type efforts to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in relation to the issues of North Korea or other rogue countries; and extend the framework beyond Japan, US, and India to other regional countries. And, once a concrete result is established, then it will be appropriate to position the forum as the stationary subsidiary organization under a regional security forum such as ARF, at the end.
(ii) Maritime Coalition for emergencies - cooperation in military aspect
Maritime Coalition for emergencies in "the Freedom of Maritime Navigation" can be difficult to implement than such coalition during the peacetime. However, to build a framework of "Maritime Coalition" in preparation for emergencies will have greater importance in the security of the whole region. There are two reasons.
First is in view of "prevention" and "confidence building." Building the framework for emergency will: enable countries to resolve any misunderstandings and clear any doubts between regional countries, through the efforts of building "Maritime Coalition" on the basis of consensus building for the peacetime with such effort in emergency in mind; enable to obtain transparency in the intention of each country; and thereby, develop trustful relationship, prevent any occurrence of conflicts, and elevate feasibility of efforts to secure stable "Freedom of Maritime Navigation."
Second reason is in view of "joint responses." If, for example, there is an actual emergency in the region over the ocean, then military and economic SLOC may be interrupted, providing serious effects on relevant parties. In addition, when regional "Freedom of Maritime Navigation" is disrupted, then the countries other than those involved will receive not only economic impacts but also fatal blow for the very existence of that nation itself, if such disruption persists for a long time.
Therefore, it is necessary to secure safe and reliable SLOC during such emergencies as well. However, if massive scale emergencies occur simultaneously at number of regions, then even the mighty US navy deployed in the integrated region may not be able to respond to every emergency, and certainly not by the capability of other individual nations. That is why it will become necessary to adopt joint response efforts to secure "Freedom of Maritime Navigation" for a certain period of time in a certain waters by regional countries other than those directly involved in emergencies. Moreover, these countries other than those involved may need to maintain maritime transport with one or all parties involved, depending on the situation. In such case, there will be a need to adopt the joint response approach.
In view of above, building a framework of regional "Maritime Coalition" with emergency situation in mind will need to be promoted, however difficult. Several approaches are possible for building such a framework, including: the extension and development of subsidiary organization under a security forum such as ARF, which is a peacetime forum for Maritime Coalition as discussed above; or the elevation of the navy to navy forum such as WPNS to more higher level and wider region. During the building of such framework, the key point of discussion will be in what way regional countries will accept the presence of US Navy which has committed itself for the whole region. Nonetheless, building a consensus for such framework will depend on how regional countries will actively address the issue.
Needless to say, SLOC links not only regional countries but extends to other regions of the world through neighboring waters. So it may be necessary to consider association with neighboring water regions such as Oceanic countries or even Middle East countries.
(3) Maritime Coalition to secure the Freedom of Maritime Activities --- Creation of multilateral convention
As mentioned before, regional counties will likely rely on oceans with expectation for the future source of various resource supplies, which are essential for the future development of each nation. The greater the expectation of each country about oceans, the more chances there are of the conflicts of interests for securing the "Freedom of Maritime Activities." Moreover, such conflicts of interests will certainly cause serious effects on regional security. This type of issues has been addressed at bilateral talks in the past, but as the regional countries rapidly expanding their range of economic activities, the talks may necessitate the involvement of many other countries. Bilateral talks seem to have hit the ceiling of their effectiveness, and sooner or later, it may become difficult to hold such talks themselves.
Therefore, what is important now is to share common values on regional waters as the resource supply source to benefit to the development of each nation and the region as a whole. That is why it will be appropriate to create a multilateral convention, i.e. the coalition conference of regional maritime use, to build a consensus for obtaining the regionally common benefits from oceans. The approach for such action can begin by adopting regional responses to multilateral issues the region is likely to face in the future, while continuing the conventional bilateral talks, and then develop into the forum to discuss every problem in the future.
As a framework for this purpose, ARF style may bring difficulties, because the issue must to be based on UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In such case, it may become necessary to establish the convention as a sub-regional or sub-functional organization under the United Nations. Nonetheless, it is needless to say that the role Japan and India must take upon the establishment and operation of such convention will be extremely important.
|
