Attitudes and Strength of the Indonesian Government in Resolving the Natuna Conflict: Analysis of Indonesia-China Interdependence Relations: Sikap dan Kekuatan Pemerintah Indonesia dalam Menyelesaikan Konflik Natuna: Analisis Hubungan Interdependensi Indonesia-Tiongkok

Fahri Wijaya Gunawan

doi:10.58330/society.v2i1.86

Authors

Fahri Wijaya Gunawan a:1:{s:5:"en_US";s:75:"Ilmu Politik, Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, Universitas Siliwangi ";}

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58330/society.v2i1.86

Keywords:

Indonesian Foreign Policy, Interdependence Relationship, Natuna Conflict

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyze the relationship between Indonesia and China independence in resolving the Natuna Sea conflict. This study uses the library study method obtained from various sources of scientific journals, books, and other news as research support. As for this research, it is known that Interdependence theory sees how peace can be achieved with a relationship of interdependence. The relationship between Indonesia and China is achieved by having a common vision between the two, so that Indonesia and China have collaborated a lot in many sectors. This cooperative relationship did not prevent the two from conflict, as evidenced by China's claim to the Natuna Sea, which is Indonesia's exclusive economic zone. Indonesia's cooperative relationship with Chinese influences Indonesia's foreign policy towards China. This can be seen from its pragmatic policies so that there are no effective results in resolving the Natuna Sea conflict.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allen, M. (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. SAGE publications.

Anggraini, S. D., Kusumawardhana, I., & Ramadhan, I. (2019). The implication of Indonesia’s IUU fishing policy in Natuna territorial waters towards South China Sea geopolitics. Jurnal Hubungan Internasional, 7(2), 118–132.

Azar, E. E., & Moon, C. I. (1986). Managing protracted social conflicts in the third world: Facilitation and development diplomacy. Millennium, 15(3), 393–406.

Christensen, T. J. (2015). The China challenge: Shaping the choices of a rising power. WW Norton & Company.

Copeland, D. (2003). Economic interdependence and the future of us-chinese relations. International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific, 323–352.

Darmayadi, A., & Purnamasari, E. N. (2022). The Indonesia–China Relations in the Natuna Sea Dispute Resolution: Struggle for Sovereignty. Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research (JEECAR), 9(1), 41–48.

Gao, Z., & Jia, B. B. (2013). The nine-dash line in the South China Sea: History, status, and implications. American Journal of International Law, 107(1), 98–123.

Goldstein, J. S., & Freeman, J. R. (1990). Three-way street: Strategic reciprocity in world politics. University of Chicago Press.

Held, D. (1991). Democracy, the nation-state and the global system. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(2), 138–172.

Hong, Z. (2013). The South China sea dispute and China-ASEAN relations. Asian Affairs, 44(1), 27–43.

Lestari, Y., Lohalo, G. O., Diur, N. K., Mushinda, B. N., Mbumba, V. M., Kianga, S. M., & Minga, P. N. (2022). Security Cooperation between China and Indonesia to Address Maritime Security Threats. Open Journal of Political Science, 12(4), 534–555.

London, T., & Hart, S. L. (2004). Reinventing strategies for emerging markets: Beyond the transnational model. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 350–370.

Pattiradjawane, R. L. (2016). The Indonesian perspective toward rising China: Balancing the national interest. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 1(3), 260–282.

Söderbaum, F., Stålgren, P., & Van Langenhove, L. (2005). The EU as a global actor and the dynamics of interregionalism: A comparative analysis. European Integration, 27(3), 365–380.

Wardhani, B., & Dugis, V. (2020). Greening Surabaya: The City’s Role in Shaping Environmental Diplomacy. Bandung, 7(2), 236–258.