Nation State: Journal of International Studies Vol. 1 No. 1 Juni 2018 P ISSN X E ISSN X

117  Download (0)

Teks penuh


Nation State: Journal of International Studies (NSJIS) adalah media terbitan berkala ilmiah yang dikelola oleh Program Studi Hubungan Internasional Universitas AMIKOM Yogyakarta. Tujuan dari jurnal ini adalah untuk memfasilitasi

penyebarluasan gagasan dan penelitian dalam ruang lingkup. Fokus dari jurnal ini adalah tema-tema hubungan internasional yang meliputi ekonomi-politik global, diplomasi dan politik luar negeri, kepemerintahan gobal, globalisasi dan masyarakat sipil global, keamanan internasional dan kawasan atau topik lain yang relevan dengan hubungan


Redaksi mengundang rekan-rekan dosen, peneliti dan pengkaji Hubungan Internasional untuk menulis di Nation State: Journal of International Studies. Naskah dapat berupa opini pemikiran maupun hasil penelitian yang disesuaikan dengan fokus dan ruang lingkup jurnal dengan panjang antara 10-25 halaman 1.15 spasi kertas ukuran 29.7 × 21 cm dengan font Garamond 14 pts. No SK Penerbitan 0005.2620391X/JI.3.1./SK.ISSN/2018.04 P ISSN 2620-391X E ISSN 2621-735X Pemimpin Redaksi Rezki Satris, S. IP, M.A. Penyunting Bagian

 Aditya Maulana Hasymi.

 Seftina Kuswardini.

 Yoga Suharman.

 Sannya Pestari Dewi. Reviewer

 Elisabeth Adyanintyas Satya Dewi, (Universitas Katholik Parahyangan, Indonesia).

 H. R. Dudy Heryadi (Universitas Padjajaran, Indonesia).

 Surwandono, (Universitas Muhammadiyah

Yogyakarta, Indonesia).

 Agus Haryanto, (Universitas Jenderal

Soedirman, Indonesia).

 Ahmad Sahide (Universitas

Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Indonesia).

 Farahdiba Rahma Bachtiar, RMIT (University, Melbourne, Australia) Alamat Redaksi:

Gedung VI.3.2

Universitas AMIKOM Yogyakarta

Jl. Ringroad Utara, Condongcatur, Depok, Sleman, Yogyakarta, 55283.

Telp: (0274)-884201 ext. 632 / 085270764035

Email : Online Journal System :



Vol. 1 No. 1 | Juni 2018

Tentang Jurnal ... i Daftar Isi ... ii

The Universality of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Does it merely express Western Values? ... 1-10

Syaiful Anam

The Democratic Republic of Congo: Endeavoring Woman Empowerement

After a War of Rape ... 11-23

Deni Meutia

Kompleksitas Keamanan Kawasan dan Tantangan Kerjasama

Keamanan Asia Timur ... 24-44

M. Najeri Al Syahrin

Female Masculinity and Power Relation in Patriarchic System:

Case Study Tomboyism of Bacha Posh in Afghanistan ... 45-60

Made Fitri Maya Padmi

Batik Sebagai Warisan Budaya Bangsa dan Nation Brand Indonesia ... 61-90

Lutfi Maulana Hakim

Narcoterrorism dan Perdagangan Senjata Ilegal sebagai

Penghubung Jaringan Terorisme Internasional ... 91-113


The Universality of the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights: Does it merely express Western Values?

Syaiful Anam

International Relations Department, Universitas Mataram, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia Email:

Submitted: 6 October 2017 | Accepted: 17 May 2018 Abstract

The debate over the universality of Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains taking place. Apart from the fact that the document remains popular and has been encouraged by many countries around the world. The debate revolves around values and cultural differences among countries claiming that Western values have been predominating the content of the declaration itself. This essay argues that the dispute towards the universality of UDHR would likely form a robust standard and values of internationally recognized human rights as long as a cross-cultural and cross-philosophical talk could be encouraged.

Keywords: Human Rights, Cultural; Difference; Universality. Abstrak

Perdebatan mengenai universalitas Deklarasi Universal tentang Hak Asasi Manusia masih terus tetap berlangsung. Terlepas dari fakta bahwa deklarasi tersebut masih populer dan telah didorong oleh banyak negara di seluruh dunia, perdebatan tersebut berkisar pada nilai dan perbedaan budaya di antara negara-negara yang mengklaim bahwa nilai-nilai Barat mendominasi isi deklarasi itu sendiri. Esai ini berargumen bahwa perdebatan terhadap universalitas Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia membentuk standar dan nilai yang kuat dari hak asasi manusia yang diakui secara internasional selama ada dorongan untuk dibahas secara lintas budaya dan filosofis.

Kata kunci: Hak Asasi Manusia; Perbedaan; Kutural, Universalitas. INTRODUCTION

Considering the need for applying universal principle of justice

throughout nation–states,

cosmopolitan scholars attempt to fortify the universality of human

rights. This concept has

institutionalized and disseminated through the creation of innumerable human rights organizations in order to advocate a noble task in upholding

human rights values in whole part of the world and in preventing human rights violations. However, the universality of human rights is not accepted by all nations. Some countries regard that human rights is merely a form of Western ideological imperialism imposed to them. Others reject it because of its values are not compatible with the religion tenets.


The debate over the universality of human rights in this essay focusing on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which many argue that it is predominantly expressing the Western values and thus it is a form of Western imperialism. It will discuss both side arguments pro and against the universality of human rights within the UDHR. The first part of the essay will then explore the historical background of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The next part of the essay will be continue with discussion of the dispute upon the universality of UDHR. The discussion will finally go on to the conclusion that the dispute towards the universality of UDHR would likely form a robust standard and values of internationally recognized human rights as long as a cross-cultural and cross-philosophical talk could be encouraged.



The modern conception of human rights created by the United

Nations (UN) emerged as the consequence of war and conflict. Human atrocities during the World War first and second have caused massive human rights violation, meanwhile at that moment there were no one universal human rights values existed. It is true that there had been certain declarations regarding human rights prior to World War II, such as the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, but it did not represent the universal values of human rights. As a result, two years after the establishment of the UN, the UN’s Secretary General, Trygve Lie, requested the draft for human rights declaration. Humprey, Saint-Lot, Roosevelt, and other drafters then drafted the first of UN Document for Human Rights. These drafters, as many people believe, have an intellectual genealogy based on Western historical progress (Spickard, 1999). Hence, it does not be surprising if the concept of UDHR is constituted by codes from Western historical experiences such as the Magna Charta


(1215), the Glorious Revolution

(1668), Thomas Jefferson’s

Declaration of Independence (1776), the US Bill of Right (1789) and as well as the thought from philosophers such as John Locke and Voltaire, who advocated the dominance of reason, science, and natural rights. These all becomes the foundation of modern human rights value and doctrine in UDHR claimed to be universally accepted and relevant.

The claim of universality in UDHR based on its aim that endeavors to protect the rights of human being regardless the race, religion, nationality, socio-economic status, gender, and other differences. Human rights related to the human

dignity which others cannot

undermine or humiliate this dignity. Human rights as well as human dignity are an inherent characteristic of human being and thus it is immutable. These rights hence function as the basis for the human equality and justice in all over the world. All human beings deserve human rights, as it is asserted by Freeman (2002) who argues that

certain rights is given to all human purely because they are being human. This idea and doctrine thus justify the universality of human rights. In addition, the expression of the universality of human rights in UDHR showed also through the ratification of at least one of the nine core international human rights treaties by all member states of the United Nations (the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 2012).

Given that human rights as universal concept and value, the United Nation approved the draft of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was proclaimed and adopted on 10 December 1948 by the General Assembly resolution 217 A (III). The main point of UDHR is about the idea that people have basic human rights as human being such as right to life, security, liberty, right to equal before the law; and constitute of freedom from fear, slavery and torture. The recognition of these rights is not because of the certain citizen status, but it is based on that they are human beings. Thus, the main concern of


UDHR itself is to encourage human rights and freedoms to be respected and guaranteed universally, as well as to monitor the process of both recognition and violation these human rights and freedoms.

Moreover, this is noteworthy that UDHR is a document reflects the intersection between morality and law. Law thus functions to protect human rights, which mean also to preserve human dignity. This notion based on the article 1 of UDHR 1948, states that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”. It is strengthened also by the article 11, states, “everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has all the guarantees necessary for his defence”. Through the ratification of international human rights treaties, governments set certain legal system and measures in order to implement the treaties in domestic level. Hence, through this domestic legal system, the principal of human rights is protected and is guaranteed as well under the

international law. In case of domestic legal system failed in preventing human rights abuses, mechanisms and procedures can be requested either by individual or group to complaint these abuses through the regional and international levels which guarantee that the standard of international human rights are respected and implemented at the local level (the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 2012). Therefore, it shows, through the role of international law, that human rights are not only universal, but also indeed this universality preserved by certain legal system and mechanism.



The universality of human rights, particularly of UDHR, are still highly debated by many who maintain that the UDHR and its international human rights norms are solely formulated by the West and hence it does not compatible for all nations. Many scholars argue that the Western


Europe and North American values predominantly represented in UDHR and hence it tends to be biased upon other values such as the values of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The rejection upon the universality of international human rights, for instance, happened at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993.

The debate was centered on the cultural differences between Asian values and Western values that were stressed by several delegations from Asia. It has warned by the Singapore foreign minister, "Universal recognition of the ideal of human rights can be harmful if universalism is used to deny or mask the reality of diversity". This also emphasized by the Chinese delegation who asserted that there should be a room for preserving the diversity in human rights (Sen, 1997). In addition, Kausikan (1993, 26) argues that what it should be focused regarding the problem of the universality of human rights values is that the reality of diverse cultural traditions, political structures, and

level of development, particularly in Asia region, will put international human rights itself to be difficult or even impossible in defining a single distinctive and coherent human rights regimes that can cover this enormous region which include its Confucianist, Buddhist, Islamic, and Hindu traditions. Although certain attempts have been continued in order to counter this challenge, throughout Asian region is still unsatisfied with a simply Western interpretation of human rights. Kausikan points out that further development in Asia region will be formed by its internal developments, yet this would consequently encounter pressures from the United States and Europe.

Another issue that questions the universality of international human rights values related to the origin of UDHR. Many scholars argue that the document of UDHR itself constituted by the codes, ethics, and values came from the Western ideology and experience and hence the Document cannot be regarded as universal. The Communist China, for instance,


questions the notion of the relationship between state and the individual. The human rights values within UDHR are underpinned by the notion of Western’s individualism that is not compatible to the China’s values. Here, Chinese foreign minister suggested a proposition that could be applicable not only in China, but also in elsewhere, that "Individuals must put the states' rights before their own" (Sen, 1997). In addition to the discontent of UDHR’s origin, the critique comes from the Moslem. For example, “Saudi Arabia rejected the Declaration’s commitment to freedom of religion, as threatening to their country’s constitutional religious setup” (Villa-Vicencio, 1992, 118). It is also reiterated by Spickard (1999) that the delegation of Saudi Arabian rejects the point in UDHR regarding the point of freedom to change one’s religion, because it is absolutely prohibited by the Qur’an except for others non-Moslem. Moreover, Saudi Arabian worried upon the impact of this right which would open wider chance to Western missionaries in the

Middle East and thus it would disrupt the religious stability in the region. Other countries such as Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, and Syria gave their support for the Saudi Arabia’s rejection in the General Assembly.

Another proposition challenges the universality of UDHR and international human rights concerns to the fact that the document indeed cannot bind all nations. Villa-Vicencio contends that “the Declaration is not itself a law, but a set of prima facie ideas, and has only been worked into international law through later U.N. Covenants that were signed as treaties, and which contained similar articles” (1992, 119). In fact, the Declarations’ commitment did not reflect the universal point of view that can bind states altogether in respecting and advocating it as a document that is universally accepted. Rather, it is merely a commitment created under the interest of Western countries. It is as Nickel (Nickel, 1987, 46) argues, that “the modern conception of human rights developed in the aftermath of the Second World War, in


part as a response to the Holocaust, culminating in the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations General Assembly”. Therefore, these all cast a doubt upon the universality of UDHR and its human rights conception and values to other non-western cultures and nations.

Apart from many rejection of the universality of UDHR, the document remains popular and has been encouraged by many countries around the world. This accomplishment would not be attained without the key role of the United Nations (UN), which has framed and disseminated the concept. Pakistan, which at the first time stood for Saudi Arabian, had ultimately changed its stance to challenge the value and regional bias came from the Muslim countries. Pakistan’s position to fight against teror is a clear gesture of its acceptance upon the universality of UDHR. If the fact that the declaration can be applied and does relevant to other non- Western states, thus it reflects that the declaration is universal.

It is also argued by most scholars that the historical process precisely prove that societies and cultures in all over the world had practiced the universality of human rights. As outlined by Pollis and Schwab (Pollis, 1979, 3) that “All societies cross- culturally and historically manifest conceptions of human rights. Such activities became part of their customs and traditional values, which were later transformed into constitutional sources, and have today, formed the

backbone of their modern

constitutions”, thus all input that given to the draft until the declaration of UDHR shaped by the universal values and doctrine that advocated by all nations around the globe.

Proponent of the universality of human rights, such as Taylor (1999), suggests that human rights as a universal concept and an unforced international consensus gained through John Rawls’ insight on an “overlapping consensus”. It outlines that although different groups and communities advocate different religious tenet, values, and


philosophical commitments, they could possibly achieve certain norms that is acknowledged altogether and is believed could govern their conduct. Jack Donelly (2003) outlines further insight regarding John Rawls’ overlapping consensus. Donelly argues that the idea of overlapping consensus can be found within the Document of UDHR. Donelly holds that the idea of overlapping consensus in fact brings the universality of human rights into the Document of Declaration. He points out that “the claim is that most leading elements in almost all contemporary societies endorse the idea that every human being has certain equal and inalienable rights and is thus entitled to equal concern and respect from the state— and that what holds this otherwise disparate group together is a fundamental commitment to human equality and autonomy” (Donelly, 2003, 51). What Donelly tries to emphasize here is regarding the structure in the society. He states that:

“Social structure, not “culture,” does the explanatory work. When the West was

filled with “traditional societies,” it had social and political ideas and practices strikingly similar to those of traditional Asia, Africa, and the Near East. Conversely, as those regions and civilizations have been similarly

penetrated by modern markets and states, the social conditions that demand human rights have been created. This is the foundation of the overlapping consensus on and the contemporary moral

universality of human rights” (Donelly,

2003, 78).

The main point here is in the notion of “modern markets and states” which have influenced the social condition to demand upon the creation of human rights. This means that modern markets and states are doing their role in explaining the need of society for human rights. Thus, it leads to a plausible reason, as explained by On (2005), that “the same threats from modern markets and states would consequently demand the same protections of human rights that are available not only to individuals in the West, but also must be made available to individuals outside the West”. In regard to this point, Donelly stresses his view that “the thrust of my argument will be that contemporary Asian individuals, families, and


societies face the same threats from modern markets and states that Western societies do, and therefore need the same protections of human rights” (Donelly, 1999, 69). However, Donelly’s insight becomes an odd since he acknowledged that the internationally recognized human rights have various ways in its implementation and interpretation (Donelly, 2003, 89). If this is the case, it could be that the Asian human rights protection would be different as in the West, and thus it turns back to the main debate whether or not human rights universally accepted and recognized by all states and societies around the globe.


This essay would like to conclude that rejection upon the universality of human rights, particularly the universality of UDHR, would likely continue as long as the norms and values within the current international human rights are not accommodating other non-Western cultures. It is not an easy task, yet the way can be found.

Concerning this problem, at last, it would suggest, as claimed by Abdullahi An-Na’im, “only by encouraging cultural and cross-philosophical conversations can one arrive at universally agreed-upon human rights standards. These standards will not reflect any one philosophy, but will reflect an emerging transnational consensus of the way social life ought to be ordered” (Spickard, 1999, 8).


Donelly, J. (1999) “Human Rights and Asian Values: A Defense of ‘Western’ Universalism”, in Joanne R. Bauer and Daniel A. Bell (eds), The East Asian Challenge for Human Rights, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Donelly, J. (2003) Universal Human Rights: In Theory and Practice, 2d. ed, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. Freeman, M. (2002) Human Rights, United

Kingdom: Polity Press.

Kausikan, B. (1993) “Asia’s Different Standard”, Foreign Policy, No. 92, p 24-41.

Nickel, JW. (1987) Making Sense of Human Rights, Berkeley: University of

California Press.

On, S. (2005) The “Relative Universality” of human rights: An assessment,

Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, Volume 4, issue 3-4, p 577-601.


Pollis, A and Schwab, P (Ed.). (1979) Human Rights: Cultural and Ideological Perspectives, New York: Praeger Publishers.

Sen, A. (1997) Human Rights and Asian Values [Online]. Available at: rel/sen.htm (Accessed: 21 March 2018).

Spickard, JV. (1999) The Origins of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

[Online]. Available at: /Spickard/OnlinePubs/OriginUDHR .pdf (Accessed: 31 Februari 2017). Taylor, C. (1999) Conditions of an Unforced

Consensus on Human Rights, In Joanne R. Bauer and Daniel A. Bell (eds). The East Asian Challenge for Human Rights. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

The United Nations. (2007) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Online). Available at: hts/2007/hrphotos/declaration%20_ eng.pd f (Accessed: 16 December 2017).

The United Nations. (2012) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Online). Available at: dhr/drafters.shtml (Accessed: 16 December 2017).

Villa-Vicencio, C. (1992) A Theology of Reconstruction: Nation-Building and Human Rights, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.


The Democratic Republic of Congo: Endeavoring Women

Empowerment after a War of Rape

Deni Meutia

International Relations Department, Universitas Respati Yogyakarta – Indonesia Email:

Submitted: 21 April 2018 | Accepted: 17 Mei 2018 Abstract

This paper analyzed the use of rape as a weapon in Democratic Republic of Congo conflict zone. Rape usually used by the arm group to weaken their enemy. This strategy did not only targeted to women but also men. Rape gave different effect toward women and men. The purpose of this paper is to explain how rape become the weapon of conflict and their effect to the victims, even men and woman. Feminist perspective used in this paper. In the end, the author found that women have a way to overcome the effect and impact of rape better than men do. Social structure, which placed men in the upper side of women, made the effect and impact on the men who experienced rape victim hard to release their suffering. Therefore, the main goal of this paper is to show how women and men could manage their self as a victim in the conflict zone.

Keywords: Women, Men, Rape, Conflict, Weapon, War. Abstrak

Dalam penelitian ini dianalisis tentang aksi pemerkosaan yang terjadi di Republik Demokratik Kongo sebagai senjata oleh kelompok bersenjata untuk melemahkan musuh. Praktiknya, aksi pemerkosaan digunakan oleh kelompok bersenjata sebagai upaya untuk melemahkan lawan. Strategi ini tak hanya berfokus pada wanita sebagai targetnya namun juga kepada laki-laki. Dalam penelitian ini digunakan perspektif feminisme. Struktur sosial yang berada dalam diri laki-laki membuatnya sulit untuk melupakan efek dan dampak dari aksi pemerkosaan apabila menjadi korban dibandingkan dengan perempuan. Tujuan besar dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menunjukkan bagaimana perempuan dan laki-laki mampu untuk mengelola dirinya sebagai korban perang dan pemerkosaan dalam wilayah konflik.

Kata Kunci: Perempuan, Laki-laki, Pemerkosaan, Konflik, Senjata, Perang.


The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), formerly named as Zaire, is a nation located in Central Africa with its population about 70 million. The Second Congo War, beginning in 1998, devastated the country, involved seven foreign armies and sometimes referred to as the

"African World War". Despite the signing of peace accords in 2003, fighting continues in the east of the country. In eastern Congo, the prevalence of rape and other sexual violence described as the worst in the world, the war is the world's deadliest conflict since World War II, killing 5.4


million people (Carayannis and Weiss, 2003). DRC are among the poorest country in the world, which is the second poorest country in the world, ahead of Zimbabwe.

The conflict in DRC was the effect of Rwandan Civil War and Rwandan Genocide. The Rwanda

Hutu Military force called

Interahamwe had fled of Rwanda to avoid aggression from Tutsi-Rwanda Government and build a camp in eastern Zaire (the former name of DRC). Then Hutu-Rwanda militia force allied with Zaire armed force (FAZ) launched campaign against Tutsi ethnics in Eastern Zaire. This alliance, led by Laurent-Désiré Kabila, might continue to the rebellion of Mobutu government who controlled DRC for along more than 2 decades. In May 1997 finally Mobutu fled the Zaire and Kabila remained become the president and changed the country name to Democratic Republic of Congo.

After becoming the President of DRC, Kabila wanted to Rwandan

military force to back to their country but it was not accepted from the militia. The Rwandan militia moved to Goma and launched the militia rebellion group against Kabila government. More rebellion group had also up; they named the group as Movement the Liberation for Congo (MLC). The rebel movement started second civil war against DRC army, backed up by Rwanda and Uganda troop, in 1998 (Carayannis and Weiss, 2003).

In 2001, Kabila assassinated and then succeeded by his son Joseph Kabila who called international intervention to end the war in Congo. In February 2001 had a peace deal between Kabila, Rwanda and Uganda to withdrawn their troop army, soon after the UN peacekeeping military MONUC came to Congo (Cayannis and Weiss, 2003). However, the conflict become worse with raised the impact that Rwanda and Uganda pending the withdrawal of the troop otherwise they sent more troo The conflict did not only destroy Congo but also affected the neighboring


country such as in borderline between Congo-Rwanda and Congo-Uganda.

The war was the world’s deathly conflict after the Second World War. The conflict remains a destructive effect for the people of Congo especially toward women and children. They become the vulnerable groups who have to be helped to gain the high standard of living.


Men in Conflict “the Genocide upon Rich-Mineral Land and Humiliation”

Even many men are the combatant and soldier army but some of men who had suffered from the conflict. Genocide, which addressed to ethnic minorities in Congo, has killed many men. This genocide became wider caused of the security of rich-mineral land that owned by some ethnic group, since the land ownership right belong to men so the men in that areas become the target of murder. To save their life, the men fled their land. According to Human Rights Watch, men also become the victim of sexual

violence (Human Right Watch: An Interview, 2010):

“On October 19, 2001, armed FDD combatants raped two children in a village near Baraka on Lake Tanganyika. A mother, Agnès T., told Human Rights Watch researchers that the assailants raped her thirteen-year-old daughter and her sixteen-year-old son in front of her. FDD rebels had attacked a group of anglers, including her son. They tied them up and later that night brought the tied-up boy to her home in search of money. Agnès T.'s husband managed to escape through a window but the assailants caught her and tied her u Four rebels raped her daughter. They also raped her son, "like a girl," said Agnès. T. Then the combatants looted the house and left. Both children suffered infections as a result, and the girl spent a month in the hospital’’.

According to Oxfam, Human Rights Watch, United Nations officials

and several Congolese aid

organizations, the number of men had been raped has risen sharply, a consequence of joint Congo-Rwanda military operations against rebels that have uncapped an appalling level of violence against civilians. Aid workers struggle to explain the sudden spike in male rape cases. The best answer, they say, is that the sexual violence against men is yet another way for armed


groups to humiliate and demoralize

Congolese communities into


What the man has than woman has in the conflict is they have freedom. They can freely leave their wife or children without worrying because the responsible to take care of children and elderly belong to women. The man also took decision to join either militia rebel group or government army look for safety. Male household heads often settle violent crimes against women and girls outside the courts. Some have "resolved" rape cases by accepting a money payment from the perpetrator or his family or by arranging to have the perpetrator marry the victim.

Women in Conflict: Sexual Violence as a Weapon of War

Women become the most vulnerable group causing by the conflict in Congo. Many women suffered from the effect of the conflict. When conflict occurred, women have been the target of war. The use of sexual weapon became the dangerous

means to dehumanize people and cheap weapon of fearing. Sexual violence as rape became the weapon in addition to ensure that communities accept the power and authority of that particular armed group neither nor the soldier bored and having nothing to do. It is about showing teror and a weapon of war (CBS News Report, 2008). Rape is like a norm in Congo. Many women and girls suffered from it every day with a new victim in each day.

In some cases soldiers and combatants raped women and girls as part of a more general attack in which they killed and injured civilians and pillaged and destroyed their property. They did this to terorize communities into accepting their control or to punish them for real or supposed aid to opposing forces, particularly if their have been recently attacked by these forces. In cases where there was no larger attack, individuals or small groups of soldiers and combatants also raped women and girls whom they found in the fields, in the forest, along the roads, or in their homes (The


Aftermath of Rape and other Forms of Sexual Violence, 2010).

The war, which has ravaged this region intermittently since 1996, has destroyed the local economy. Driven by desperate poverty, women who provided the resources to keep their families alive continued going to the fields to cultivate, to the forest to make charcoal, or to markets to trade their goods even though doing so put them at risk of sexual violence (The Aftermath of Rape and Other Forms of Sexual Violence, 2010). Soldiers and combatants preyed upon such women and girls as well as on others who had fled combat to live in temporary and fragile structures in the forest. In many cases, combatants abducted women and girls and took them to their bases in the forest where they forced them to provide sexual services and domestic labor, sometimes for periods of more than a year. Among the hundreds of thousands displaced by the war were many women who sought safety for themselves and their families in towns. Some rapists aggravated their crimes by other acts of extraordinary brutality,

shooting victims in the vagina or mutilating them with knives or razor blades. Some attacked girls as young as five years of age or elderly women as old as eighty. Some killed their victims outright while others left them to die of their injuries. However, rape and other sexual crimes not just carried out by armed factions but also police and others in positions of authority and power, and by opportunistic common criminals and bandits, taking advantage of the prevailing climate of impunity and the culture of violence against women and girls (The Aftermath of Rape and Other Forms of Sexual Violence, 2010). Irregular combatants and regular soldiers responsible for acts of sexual violence commit war crimes. In some cases, their crimes could amount to crimes against humanity.

Rape as weapon of war considered as an instrument to take power rather than sexual activity (Mullins, 2009, 49). The victim of rape who was largely women come from

gendered power dynamics.


made them weak and unsecure. In the conflict zone, it became worse because of the lack economy infrastructure. Otherwise, women was being the only one family member who had to take care of them. Even in the wartime, women still going to the fields to cultivate, to the forest to make charcoal, or to markets to trade their goods even though doing so puts them at risk of sexual violence. Conflict creates desperate conditions where men rape women to sustain themselves to continue fighting (Brown, 2012, 29). in very simple way we can assume that rape is not so much about sex but the power of men to survive in another day. It related to patriarchy which putting women inferior to men in society. Taken together, the cultural and structural research on rape establishes that within a civilian context, sexual assault is organized and regulated within a social order, as it reinforces male beliefs about sexual privilege and access (Mullins, 2009, 25).

The Gender Perspective: How Men and Women Get Difference Experience to Relief the Effect of Conflict?

Feminist theory takes into account the gender inequality and gender roles that could be used to explaining the provocation and use of rape. The absolute status of women together with gender equality is highly influential in the presence of rape in a society. In addition, it emphasize “the unique role of women as a class within the economic structure”. In other words, a woman’s status, both socially and economically, plays a significant role in their victimization of rape (Klein in Brown, 2012, 321). Congo’s male patriarchy created a culture for men to exploit and abuse women. Rape became an instrument to justify male domination and power spread fear for managing their status in gender stratification system. In wartime, rape used by the combatant to overpower women and placed them in submission. Women became an object of men brutality because of a long conflict frustration.


Women and girls of eastern Congo, their families, and the larger community have developed different strategies to protect them from sexual violence. Some families have sent their women and girls to safer locations. Another frequently used strategy is seeking safety in numbers. When possible, women and girls try to go to market, to the forest, or to the fields in groups; hoping that can discourage assailants. Sometimes effective, this practice at other times just delivers larger numbers of women and girls into the hands of assailants. In a variant of this strategy, older women, thought to be less vulnerable to attack, have replaced young women and girls in carrying out activities that require traveling some distance from home. Useful in protecting those who might otherwise be most targeted, this strategy provides no protection for the older women. In towns, some women and girls now wear an extra layer of clothes known as umugondo or just gondo to make it more difficult for assailants to get at their bodies (The War within The War; by Human Right

Report, 2010). If confronted by armed men who intended to rape them, some women and girls have fought back, using their wits as well as their fists and feet. Some have tried to shame or persuade their assailants to leave them alone while others have resisted physically or fled. Given the disproportionate power in the hands of the assailants, relatively few women and girls succeeded in escaping rape and other injuries.

Now some of the women are fighting back the only way they know how – by talking about what happened. A campaign spearheaded by the U.N. Children’s Fund is working with local groups to break traditional taboos around talking about the violence. They are using radio stations broadcasting in local languages, and more activists are getting to remote areas.

“Many more victims are coming forward. We receive a lot of SMS text messages and cell phone calls from women who have been raped and need help,” says campaign

leader Esther Ntoto (Faul, 2009).

The UN officials began bringing together women to tell their stories to


rooms full of local officials, community leaders, even children. One sign of success is that more men than women have volunteered for training to encourage victims to come forward and their communities to confront the issues. Video footage of the campaign Women Breaking the Silence shows officials startled by the atrocities recounted. A provincial minister interrupted to ask reporters not to film a woman’s face. However, she took the microphone to declare:

“I am not ashamed to show my face and publish my identity. The shame lies with those who broke me open and with the authorities who failed to protect me. If you don’t hear me, see me, you will not

understand why it is so important that we

fight this together” (Human Right

Watch, 2010).

That woman, Honorata Kizende, described how her life as a schoolteacher and the mother of seven children ended when she has kidnapped in 2001. She has held as a sex slave for 18 months and passed around from one Hutu fighter to another until she escaped. She is now a counselor and trains others to help

survivors of sexual violence (The New York Times, 2009).

In other side, men are differently facing up their trauma. They have no courage to release their pain in front of public society that is why men are likely suffering so deep in sexual abuses. However, nobody knows the exact number. Men here, like anywhere, are reluctant to come forward. Several who did said they instantly became castaways in their villages, lonely, ridiculed figures, derisively referred to as “bush wives”. (The New York Times, 2009). The male rape cases are still just a fraction of those against women. However, for the men involved, aid workers say, it is even harder to bounce back. In

addition, in a place where

homosexuality is so taboo, the rapes carry an extra dose of shame. The humiliation is often so severe that male rape victims come forward only if they have urgent health problems, like stomach swelling or continuous bleeding. Sometimes even that is not enough. In some case, there are two men penises were cinched with rope


died a few days later because they were too embarrassed to seek hel Castrations also seem to be increasing, with more butchered men showing up at major hospitals.

Women and men are differently facing up the pain caused of rape. When women suffered the pain caused of rape, they can easily release from the trauma by sharing out with another woman or people who care to them. This is the nature of women. Nevertheless, men have different manner in facing up their trauma. Sharing out the bad experience is something embarrassing for men. Men are the symbol of power and dignity in Congo, when they got some of shameful experience it made them powerless and did not have their privilege anymore that is why it is difficult toward men to recover from rape experience. Therefore, the greatest silence among the victims of sexual abuse exactly happened to men, because they do not have courage to face society about what they had experienced.

Building Peace in the Democratic Republic of Congo

How to make peace in Congo sustainable for every people in that country? Need many efforts to make it true, men and women have to be involved in peace building process. Peace building cannot success if half the population excluded from the process. That is the reason why women have to be involved to build peace because they are the victims of the conflict, they know what should to be the best to them. The decision making of peace building process dominated by men in every place of conflict, but they don’t experience what the women and children feel about the conflict so the result of peace building programs seem to be masculine project. It is about changing gender norms to make peace in Democratic Republic of Congo. In the men’s mind, attack to the one person is the attack to the whole community. Therefore, it is difficult how to change his or her belief and try to give understanding that it is about


humiliation and every people should have rescued.

Rape has numerous

consequences, including physical injury, psychosocial trauma, unwanted pregnancies, fistulae and HIV/AIDS infection. The lack of capacity in terms of medical personnel and basic equipment are impediments to fully taking into account the needs of victims who often live in remote and inaccessible areas. In order to respond to the victim’ immediate needs, health structures must be available and equipped and health personnel trained properly. Sexual and gender-based violence prevention and response demand that the health system restored. This will contribute significantly to peacebuilding nationwide. Peace could not be achieved without peace in the hearts and souls of the victims of sexual and gender-based violence. Mental and emotional healing blazes a trail for forgiveness, a prerequisite for peace. The fight against poverty and economic exclusion also facilitates peacebuilding. The lack of security and

protection of civilians is conducive to an environment where perpetrators not denounced for fear of reprisal. As a result, thousands of victims do not seek justice and suffer from psychological and physical injuries in silence. This attitude, which stems from fear and disenchantment vis-a-vis the judicial system, hinders national reconciliation, peacebuilding and development efforts in the country.

The understanding of gender

perspective will enable them to better fulfil their role as protectors of vulnerable groups (UNDP and UNFPA report, 2010).

Reaffirming the role of women in preventing and resolving conflicts, it called for increasing their decision- making participation in all institutions dealing with conflict. Women remain marginalized in formal peace processes and post-conflict governments. Although the stereotype of “women as only victims” should not reinforced, the scale of discrimination and violence against women in each armed conflict remains the central obstacle to expanding the good work being done


by women peacebuilders. Because those who are courageous and capable enough to involve themselves as catalysts in peacebuilding are an endangered minority, they should become safe guarded and strengthened with funding, training and inclusion in decision-making mechanisms that shape fundamental questions of security and development.

Their organizations identified at the outset of peacemaking processes and helped to work within broader peace initiatives and to communicate their messages to both national leaders and the international community. Women make a difference in part because they often adopt a more inclusive approach toward security and address key social and economic issues that would otherwise be ignored. (UNDP and UNFPA report, 2010).


The Congo conflict became the worse conflict in the world as the used of sexual violence as a weapon of war. Not only women who become the victims but also men. However, there

is different way in facing the pain between men and women. According to the men, when they committed the sexual violence it would be so embarrassing for them, because the patriarchal system who believe that men are symbol of power. Being abuse, for men, made them as the subordinate civilian just like women.

There is a famous call toward men have been abused as “bush-wife”. Become the “bush-wife” made a man no longer a man any more; he lost his dignity as a man. That is why the male rape victim rarely found because of they too feared to speak out.

Even society believe that the greatest silence – fact that a lot of women who have been raped, but did not want to speak about – come for women but women still have their courage in facing up their pain and move their life. Women in social system in Congo are responsible for caring children and any household job. As long as the men disappeared, the women become the backbone of family this is provide them a power to


continue their life. Women found their way to release from such emotional trauma by sharing their experienced with other victims and make abound to help the rape victims to face up their life.

Even though women have a capability to become the peace builder but there still a low awareness to involve women in peace building project. Any decision making do not involving women in so that what will happen are any project made by decision maker do not touch the main cause of the problem. It should be more women participation in the peace-building project, because they know what should be do. In the conflict like Congo, there is need strong effort changing gender norm to make peace in that place remains sustainable.


Amnesty International. (2004) DRC: Mass Rape – Time for Remedies (Online). ent s/afr62/018/2004/en/ (Accessed: 13 December 2010).

Brown, Carly. (2012) “Rape as Weapon of War in The Democratic Republic of Congo”, Torture, Vol. 22 Number 1,

Carayannis, T. and Weiss, H. (2003) The Democratic Republic of Congo, 1996-2002, in Boulden, J. (ed) Dealing with conflict in Africa: The United Nations and Regional Organizations. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

CBS News Report. (2008) War against Woman, the Use of Rape As a Weapon in Congo’s Civil War (Online). Available at: - against-women/ (Accessed:

December 09, 2010).

Faul, Michelle. (2009) Congo Women Fight Back, Speak out about Rape (Online). Available at: 77/ns/world_news-africa/t/congo- women-fight-back-speak-out-about- rape/#.WxIkKIoxXDc (Accessed: December 13, 2010).

Human Right Watch. (t.t) An Interview

(Online). Available at: tns.html (Accessed: December 09, 2010).

Human Rights Watch. (2002) The War within War: Sexual Violence against Woman and Girls in Eastern Congo. New York: Human Rights Watch, pp. 27- 37. International Crisis Group. (2009) Congo:

Five Priorities for a Peacebuilding Strategy

(Online). Available at:

https://www.crisisgrouorg/africa/cen tra l-africa/democratic-republic- congo/congo-five-priorities-

peacebuilding-strategy (Accessed: May 2010).

Mullins C. (2009) “We Are Going To Rape You And Taste Tutsi Women: Rape During The 1994 Rwandan

Genocide”, The British Journal of Criminology, Volume 49, Issue 6, 1 November 2009, pp. 19–735. UNDP and UNFPA Report. (2010) Post-

conflict Peacebuilding in Africa: the Role of UNDP and UNFPA in the Democratic


Republic of the Congo (Online). Available at:

web.undorg/execbrd/word/DRC%2 0Backgrou nd%20Note.doc


Kompleksitas Keamanan Kawasan dan Tantangan Kerja Sama

Keamanan Asia Timur

M. Najeri Al Syahrin

Program Studi Hubungan Internasional

Universitas Muhammadiyah Kalimantan Timur – Indonesia Email:

Diserahkan: 8 Maret 2018 | Diterima: 17 Mei 2018 Abstract

This article will explain the regional security complex as a key challenge in the establishment of regional security cooperation in East Asia. The complex of security in East Asia described by explaining the security relations between North Korea and South Korea, China and Japan, the United States with Japan, and China with the United States and a pattern of chain reaction to the various security policies of these countries. This security complex makes it difficult to establish effective regional security cooperation. The Challenge of the regional security complex that most decisive in the formation of cooperation that will be done by the countries of the East Asia region is due to competition and differences of interests between the United States and China as a superpower state in the region. In addition, the many differences in the nature and orientation of political interests of Japan, South Korea, and North Korea are also still a constraint in the formation of regional security organizations and cooperation.

Keywords: Complexity, Security, Regional, Challenge. Abstrak

Artikel ini akan menjelaskan tentang kompleksitas keamanan kawasan sebagai tantangan utama dalam pembentukan kerja sama keamanan kawasan di Asia Timur. Kompleksitas keamanan yang terjadi di kawasan Asia Timur di uraikan dengan menjelaskan hubungan keamanan antara Korea Utara dan Korea Selatan, Cina dan Jepang, Amerika Serikat dengan Jepang, serta Cina dengan Amerika Serikat serta pola aksi-reaksi atas berbagai kebijakan keamanan negara-negara tersebut. Kompleksitas keamanan ini menyebabkan sulit terbentuknya kerja sama keamanan kawasan yang efektif. Tantangan dalam kompleksitas keamanan kawasan yang paling menentukan dalam pembentukan kerja sama yang akan dilakukan oleh negara-negara kawasan Asia Timur adalah karena kompetisi dan perbedaan kepentingan antara Amerika Serikat dan Cina sebagai negara adidaya di kawasan. Selain itu, banyaknya perbedaan sifat dan orientasi kepentingan politik Jepang, Korea Selatan dan Korea Utara juga masih menjadi kendala dalam pembentukan organisasi dan kerja sama keamanan kawasan.

Kata Kunci: Kompleksitas, Keamanan, Kawasan, Tantangan.


Dalam upaya untuk memberikan respon terhadap setiap tantangan keamanan di kawasan, pengaturan kerja sama keamanan sangat mutlak

diperlukan. Peningkatan eskalasi konflik cenderung mudah terjadi di kawasan akibat minimnya pengaturan kerja sama. Regionalisasi dan


pembentukan institusi keamanan kawasan menjadi semakin krusial untuk dibutuhkan apabila koordinasi kebijakan antarnegara dilakukan secara intensif. Kerja sama kawasan juga berguna dalam proses penyelesaian konflik dan sengketa antarnegara di kawasan (Tang, 2009, 589-590).

Kawasan Asia Timur merupakan titik strategis di mana kepentingan negara-negara besar bertemu. Cina, Jepang, Korea Selatan dan Korea Utara saling berebut pengaruh politik dan ekonomi di kawasan ini. Kondisi ini semakin tidak menentu ketika Amerika Serikat juga ikut terlibat aktif dalam pengaturan keamanan di kawasan Asia Timur. Partisipasi aktif Amerika Serikat dalam aliansi militer trilateral dengan Jepang dan Korea Selatan menyebabkan stabilitas keamanan kawasan sangat dipengaruhi oleh interaksi keamanan negara-negara tersebut. Stabilitas keamanan yang tidak menentu akan menyebabkan kawasan dalam kondisi potensial untuk terjadinya konflik. Permasalahannya adalah selama ini, kawasan Asia Timur belum memiliki kerangka kerja sama

dan institusi keamanan yang secara efektif mampu untuk meredakan tensi ketegangan antarnegara di kawasan.

Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk

mendeskripsikan implikasi

kompleksitas keamanan kawasan terhadap sulitnya pembentukan kerja sama keamanan kawasan yang efektif di Asia Timur. Urgensi tulisan ini terlihat dari uniknya kompleksitas kawasan dan hubungan keamanan di Asia Timur, khususnya antara Cina dengan Jepang, Korea Utara dan Korea Selatan, serta peranan Amerika Serikat di kawasan. Hal tersebut menjadi sangat menarik untuk diteliti karena kelima negara ini memegang peranan kunci dalam stabilitas kawasan, dilihat dari kapabilitas militer dan persenjataan nuklir yang dimiliki serta daya tawar politik dan ekonomi masing-masing negara.

Dua pertanyaan utama akan dijawab dalam tulisan ini. Pertama

bagaimana gambaran tentang

kompleksitas keamanan kawasan yang terjadi di kawasan Asia Timur. Pertanyaan kedua adalah bagaimana


bentuk tantangan dan implikasi dari kompleksitas keamanan tersebut terhadap peluang pembentukan kerja sama keamanan kawasan, di tengah kondisi keamanan yang rumit antara negara-negara di kawasan Asia Timur. Kedua pertanyaan tersebut akan dijawab melalui deskripsi tentang peranan kekuatan eksternal yang mengambil bentuk masuknya negara luar ke dalam wilayah kawasan ataupun dibangunnya suatu kerja sama atau aliansi antara negara luar dengan satu atau beberapa negara dalam kawasan. Tanpa adanya kerja sama keamanan kawasan di Asia Timur, negara-negara cenderung akan menciptakan pola

persahabatan yang mendasari

terbentuknya formulasi kedekatan serta juga akan menciptakan pola permusuhan dalam suatu kawasan yang mungkin bisa berimplikasi pada terjadinya perang antarnegara.


Kompleksitas Keamanan Kawasan Asia Timur

Dalam menjelaskan tentang

kompleksitas keamanan kawasan, perlu kiranya secara komprehensif

terlebih dahulu memahami teori kompleksitas keamanan kawasan.

Kerangka analisis yang digunakan untuk menjawab pertanyaan dalam tulisan ini adalah kerangka teoritis yang dicetuskan oleh Barry Buzan (regional

security complex theory) sebagai landasan

dalam memahami rumitnya fenomena keamanan di kawasan Asia Timur.

Dalam teori tersebut, Buzan

berpendapat bahwa region bukanlah berarti berarti teritori saja, tetapi juga merupakan konsep kawasan yang mana proses sekuritisasi, desekuritisasi dan interaksi antara negara didalamnya saling terhubung dan memiliki keterkaitan. Masalah keamanan negara-negara dalam kawasan tersebut juga tidak dapat dianalisis secara terpisah (Buzan & Waever, 2003, 54).

Secara sederhana, teori ini

berfokus pada unsur-unsur

pembentuk kompleksitas keamanan dalam suatu kawasan tertentu. Dalam uraian yang berbeda, Buzan dan Waever menyatakan bahwa faktor geografis, etnisitas, dan budaya masyarakat di suatu wilayah juga bisa


menimbulkan kompleksitas keamanan

kawasan, ketika terdapat

ketergantungan dan hubungan

keamanan antarnegara dalam kawasan tersebut. Secara khusus, hal ini kemudian akan juga mempengaruhi perkembangan sistem ekonomi dan politik yang akan menimbulkan saling ketergantungan antarnegara. Pada

akhirnya, kondisi ini akan

memunculkan sistem pertahanan keamanan kawasan dan aliansi militer akibat dari perubahan tersebut (Buzan & Waever, 2003, 46-48).

Menurut Buzan dan Waever terdapat empat hal yang menjadi pembentuk struktur dasar dari terciptanya kompleksitas keamanan kawasan, yaitu kedekatan geografis, anarkisme kawasan, dan polaritas kekuatan serta konstruksi sosial berupa amity (pola persahabatan) dan enmity (pola permusuhan). Terbentuknya pola ketergantungan antarnegara tersebut baik ketergantungan yang bersifat amity maupun enmity dalam kompleks keamanan kawasan secara

langsung akan menyebabkan

persaingan antaranegara dan

meningkatkan kecurigaan keamanan. Akibatnya aliansi keamanan dan masuknya kekuatan eksternal semakin intens terjadi dalam kondisi ini (Buzan & Waever 2003, 53).

Teori ini menjelaskan tentang aspek-aspek pembentuk kompleksitas keamanan kawasan yang saling berhubungan dan memberikan aksi- reaksi dan timbal balik. Salah satu aspek penting dalam pembentuk kompleksitas keamanan kawasan adalah anarkisme kawasan. Anarkisme kawasan mengakibatkan minimnya dialog dan proses komunikasi dalam bentuk kerja sama atau perjanjian bilateral maupun multilateral sehingga mengakibatkan tingginya kecurigaan antarnegara. Anarkisme kawasan juga ditunjukkan dengan tidak adanya otoritas yang berwenang dalam proses penyelesaian secara damai apabila terjadi konflik di antara negara-negara kawasan Asia Timur (Buzan & Waever, 2003, 53-54).

Keamanan suatu negara tidak bisa dipisahkan dengan keamanan negara lain, baik dari skala regional


maupun global, karena kawasan merupakan arena di mana dinamika keamanan nasional dan keamanan

global saling berkaitan dan

mempengaruhi satu sama lain. Sebagai bukti di kawasan Asia Timur, dinamika

keamanan global sangat

mempengaruhi pola hubungan

keamanan negara-negara dalam

kawasan tersebut. Perseteruan ideologi antara Amerika Serikat dengan Uni Soviet pada masa Perang Dingin telah membuat kompetisi perseteruan antara dua negara Korea, Korea Utara dan Korea Selatan, dimana kini rivalitas keduanya membuat situasi keamanan Asia Timur semakin tidak menentu. Interaksi antara keamanan global dan regional memicu adanya intervensi negara adidaya yang pada akhirnya merubah persepsi ancaman dan pola keamanan antarnegara di kawasan (Buzan & Waever, 2003, 131-132).

Barry Buzan (1991) melengkapi penjelasan tentang teori kompleksitas

keamanan kawasan dengan

memberikan uraian bahwa proses sekuritisasi maupun desekuritasasi

suatu negara merupakan proses interaksi terhadap keamanan negara lain. Dengan demikian, untuk memahami kompleksitas keamanan kawasan, tidak cukup hanya dengan memahami keamanan satu negara saja, tetapi juga harus memahami keamanan negara lain dan interaksi keamanan negara-negara tersebut. Terdapat juga beberapa aspek lain yang berpengaruh dalam pembentukan kompleksitas keamanan kawasan, yaitu kondisi keamanan domestik yang tidak stabil, interaksi antarkawasan dan juga peran kekuatan global. Dengan memahami

aspek-aspek tersebut maka

kompleksitas keamanan kawasan bisa dideskripsikan secara utuh dan komprehensif (Buzan, 1991, 53-54).

Kompleksitas keamanan kawasan Asia Timur dapat dipahami dengan mengurai kerumitan antara hubungan keamanan Cina, Korea Utara, Korea Selatan, Jepang dan Amerika Serikat. Kerumitan hubungan tersebut dapat terlihat pada persepsi Cina dan Korea Selatan yang mencurigai upaya Jepang yang ingin melakukan revisi sejarah


Korea dan sebagian wilayah Cina pada awal abad ke-20. Hubungan Cina dan Korea Selatan juga tidak sepenuhnya mulus. Cina telah menyampaikan

keberatannya atas rencana

penempatan sistem antirudal canggih Korea Selatan yang dipasang untuk mewaspadai ancaman nuklir Korea Utara. Hal tersebut dinilai Cina mencerminkan keinginan Amerika Serikat untuk mengawasi Cina. Sengketa wilayah juga semakin memperumit hubungan keamanan antara negara-negara tersebut, Cina dan Jepang masih bersengketa soal pulau Diaoyu atau Senkaku di Laut Cina Selatan. Cina dan Korea Selatan juga masih terlibat dalam sengketa wilayah dengan Jepang soal sejumlah pulau di Laut Cina Timur dan perairan antara Jepang dan Korea Selatan (Kwaak, 2015).

Pertumbuhan ekonomi Cina dianggap menjadi ancaman baru tidak hanya bagi Amerika Serikat tetapi juga bagi Korea Selatan dan Jepang.

Permasalahan ini dikarenakan

kekuatan ekonomi akan menunjang perkembangan militer dan modernisasi

sistem persenjataan Cina. Didukung dengan pertumbuhan ekonomi, maka pertumbuhan militer akan tumbuh beriringan. Peningkatan kapabilitas militer tersebut merupakan bentuk modernisasi yang dilakukan dengan meningkatkan anggaran belanja dengan fokus pembaruan alutsista dan sistem persenjataan. Perkembangan kekuatan militer Cina pasti akan membuat khawatir Amerika Serikat dan negara aliansinya di Asia Timur seperti Jepang dan Korea Selatan. Upaya untuk membendung kekuatan Cina tersebut di lakukan dengan semakin meningkatkan hubungan keamanan dan mitra strategis tidak hanya dengan Jepang tetapi juga dengan Korea Selatan. Kunjungan Trump pada November 2017 ke Jepang dan Korea Selatan merupakan salah satu bukti bahwa Amerika Serikat selalu menjadikan kepentingan keamanan Asia Timur menjadi salah satu prioritas utama kebijakan luar negerinya. Oleh karena itu dalam beberapa tahun ini, Amerika Serikat selalu menempatkan kepentingan yang strategis di kawasan dengan tujuan


utama untuk membendung pengaruh dan hegemoni Cina (Goo & Lee, 2014, p. 337).

Uniknya dalam hubungan

keamanan Asia Timur, bagi Korea Selatan, Cina tidak selalu menjadi ancaman yang mengkhawatirkan bagi keamanan nasionalnya. Ancaman yang nyata bagi Korea Selatan bukanlah Cina, tetapi Korea Utara. Oleh karena itu, upaya untuk membendung

kekuatan Korea Utara selalu

diupayakan Korea Selatan dalam aliansi strategisnya dengan Amerika Serikat. Dalam aliansinya tersebut, Korea Selatan tidak selalu merespon aktif segala kebijakan yang berkaitan dengan Cina, karena fokus utama ancaman keamanan Korea Selatan adalah Korea Utara. Disisi yang lain, secara historis bahkan Korea Selatan dan Cina sama-sama memiliki sifat sentimen yang tinggi terhadap Jepang.

Sementara bagi Jepang, Cina

merupakan permasalahan utama

keamanan di kawasan, Jepang selalu memberikan respon aktif terkait dengan permasalahan Cina. Dengan menguatnya peranan Cina yang

memiliki potensi untuk mendominasi Asia Timur, Jepang selalu merasa kredibilitasnya di kawasan akan terancam. Ancaman tersebut akan berdampak langsung bagi Jepang, karena secara geografis berada dekat dengan Cina, sehingga ia merasa perlu melakukan penguatan kembali dengan upaya menekan perkembangan militer Cina. Bagi Jepang, peningkatan

kekuatan militer dan sistem

persenjataan Cina memberikan

ancaman yang serius terhadap

keamanan nasionalnya dan

kepentingan Jepang tidak hanya di kawasan tetapi juga pada ranah global (Goo & Lee, 2014, 337).

Bagi Jepang, Cina dan Korea Utara merupakan ancaman serius bagi stabilitas keamanan kawasan Asia Timur, sementara bagi Cina dan Korea Utara, Amerika Serikat, Jepang, dan Korea Selatan yang tergabung dalam aliansi keamanan justru mengancam negara-negara lain di kawasan. Meskipun demikian, hubungan antara Jepang dan Korea Selatan juga tidak selalu harmonis, meskipun keduanya


keamanan Amerika Serikat (Goo & Lee, 2014, 337). Kerumitan hubungan

antarnegara tersebut semakin

meningkatkan kecurigaan dan

menambah kompleksitas keamanan kawasan.

Permasalahan Semenanjung

Korea juga merupakan salah satu aspek penting dalam kompleksitas keamanan kawasan Asia Timur. Pengembangan senjata nuklir yang

dilakukan oleh Korea Utara

merupakan salah satu cara dan upaya manuver politik untuk meningkatkan posisi tawar di dunia internasional, khususnya terhadap Amerika Serikat dan negara-negara aliansinya di kawasan Asia Timur (Mochammad, 2010, 27-29). Upaya Amerika Serikat

untuk melakukan normalisasi

hubungan dengan Korea Utara sudah dilakukan sejak masa akhir Perang Dingin. Upaya rekonsiliasi konflik guna meredam ketegangan kawasan akibat perkembangan nuklir Korea Utara adalah dengan menyepakati kerangka kerja sama keamanan senjata nuklir. Six Party Talks merupakan kerangka kerja sama yang di sepakati

pada tahun 2003, dengan melibatkan Korea Utara, Korea Selatan, Cina, Jepang, Amerika Serikat dan Rusia. Kerja sama ini merupakan bukti dan perwujudan upaya alternatif yang ditawarkan Amerika Serikat untuk meredam ketegangan konflik militer dan perlombaan senjata di kawasan Asia Timur (Armstrong, 2006, 11). Meskipun hingga kini, Amerika Serikat masih kesulitan untuk mengajak Korea Utara untuk menghentikan provokasi nuklirnya. Alhasil ketegangan di kawasan akibat pengembangan nuklir Korea Utara tersebut masih terus terjadi.

Argumen menarik lainnya yang

disampaikan oleh Armstrong

(Armstrong dikutip Feffer, 2006, 11-13) menyatakan bahwa gagalnya upaya perundingan antara Amerika Serikat dengan Korea Utara dalam masalah nuklir adalah karena Amerika Serikat dianggap tidak berhasil dalam

mendorong upaya harmonisasi

hubungan antara Korea Utara dan Korea Selatan. Sehingga hal tersebut menciptakan terjadinya dilema keamanan antara kedua negara


tersebut. Selama ini, perjanjian dan kesepakatan dalam kerja sama yang sudah dilakukan masih tidak efektif dan belum mampu menghilangkan dilema keamanan yang terjadi. Korea Utara masih menyakini bahwa Amerika Serikat sebagai negara musuh dan anti rezim Korea Utara. Kecaman yang sering dilontarkan oleh Presiden Amerika Serikat, Donald Trump semakin memperkeruh suasana dan hubungan antara kedua negara. Persepsi itulah yang kini semakin menyulitkan Amerika Serikat dalam melakukan harmonisasi hubungan di

Semenanjung Korea. Padahal

harmonisasi tersebut merupakan salah satu faktor penting dalam upaya rekonsiliasi konflik di kawasan.

Kebijakan Korea Utara terus dipantau oleh Korea Selatan, Jepang dan Amerika Serikat. Dalam hal ini penting juga untuk melihat reaksi Cina dalam kebijakan keamanan Korea Utara. Kebijakan Korea Utara yang ingin melakukan serangan ke pulau Yeonpyeong dan negara Guam, merupakan salah satu upaya untuk melihat apakah Cina akan menentang

kebijakan Korea Utara tersebut. Paska rencana tersebut, meskipun kini tidak terealisasi, Cina terbukti bersikap pasif dan terkesan membiarkan kebijakan provokatif Korea Utara tersebut. Hal ini tentu saja secara tidak langsung menyatakan bahwa Cina bersikap tidak kooperatif dalam upaya normalisasi hubungan antar dua Korea (Saunders 2012, 17).

Untuk memahami kondisi

tersebut, dari sudut pandang Cina, ia menilai bahwa kebijakan provokatif Korea Utara merupakan respon atas kebijakan pembentukan aliansi militer Amerika Serikat, bagi Korea Utara jelas untuk selalu menunjukan bahwa Korea Utara bukanlah negara lemah. Cina juga menyadari bahwa negaranya hanya memiliki sedikit pengaruh bagi rezim Korea Utara. Kemampuan senjata nuklir telah menjadikan Korea Utara kini sudah tidak terlalu bergantung kepada Cina, seperti pada masa Perang Korea dahulu. Jadi sangat penting bagi Cina untuk secara cermat mempetakan posisi Korea Utara sebagai negara mitra dalam kerja sama kawasan.



Related subjects :