Malaysia Territorial Disputes - Sipadan LigitanPresentation Transcript
UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA COLLAGE OF LAW GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES GFPP 2223: FOREIGN POLICY MALAYSIA TERITORIAL DISPUTES: SIPADAN – LIGITAN (INDONESIA) Decision Rendered On Dec 17, 2002 PRIDHIVRAJ NAIDU (127445)
Territorial dispute is a disagreement over the possession or control of land between two or more states or over the possession or control of land by one state after it has conquered it from a former state no longer currently recognized by the occupying power.
Pulau sipadan and ligitan is a very small islands in the Celebes Sea of the northeast coast of the islands of borneo, which divided between Indonesia and Malaysia
BACKGROUND OF CASE
The dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia, sticking out in 1967
Malaysia and Indonesia held several meetings to delineate their CSB from September 9 to September 22, 1969 in Kuala Lumpur
The problem was discussed by the Malaysian Prime Minister Hussein Onn and Indonesian President Suharto in a meeting on March 26, 1980
In 1976, the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, or TAC (Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia) in the first ASEAN Summit in Bali Island
In October 1991, established the Joint Working Group (JWG)
The JWG met on July 6, 1992, January 26-27, 1994 and on September 8, 1994 respectively. All meetings broke down.
On September 14, 1994, following the failure of JWG, Tun Mahathir proposed to Indonesia to have the dispute referred to the ICJ.
During his visit to Kuala Lumpur on October 7, 1996, President Soeharto finally approved the proposal of Prime Minister Mahathir to bring the case to ICJ.
On November 2, 1998, Indonesia and Malaysia submitted their intention to the ICJ by notifying its Registrar of the compromise signed by both countries on May 31, 1997 in Kuala Lumpur.
It entered into force on May 14, 1998.
SIPADAN DIVE RESORT
(60% GOVT OWNED)
*On 17 December 2002 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) handed down its final and binding judgment on the case concerning,
*Sovereignty over Pulau Sipadan and Pulau Ligitan finding by 16 votes to one that Malaysia has sovereignty over the islands.
PERSPECTIVE OF ANALYSIS
RATIONAL ACTOR MODAL
The model adopts the state as the primary unit of analysis, and inter-state relation as the context for analysis.
The state is seen as a monolithic unitary actor, capable of making rational decisions based on preference ranking and value maximization.
According to the rational actor model, a rational decision making process is used by a state.
BASIC UNIT OF ANALYSIS
- Malaysia (Tun Mahathir)
- Indonesia (President Soeharto)
- Territorial dispute
- Compromise by both states (1997)
ACTION AS RATIONAL CHOICE (INSTRUMENTS OF FP)
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
TERRITORY: SOVEREIGNITY IS TERRITORIAL IN NATURE
BOTH COUNTRIES ARE SAFEGOURDING THEIR TERRITORIAL INTERGRITY
ACTION AS RATIONAL CHOICE
MILITARY (EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION)
INTELLIGENCE (REGARDING ACTIVITIES OF THE PLAINTIF)
ACTIONS AS RATIONAL CHOICE
EACH DECISIONS MADE BRINGS EFFECT, CONCERNS OF THE OTHER PARTY
LIMITED MILITARY INVOLVEMENT
THIS CASE TOOK IN TO ACCOUNT THE OTHER PARTIES MIGHT & CAPABILITY TO RETALIATE IN ALL ASPECTS
ACTIONS AS RATIONAL CHOICE
RATIONAL CHOICE IS MADE IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE VALUE/OUTCOME
DIPLOMATIC MEANS & ICJ
DOMINANT INFERENCE PATTERN
An action took by a state is presumed to have assurance over the result at its favor. This assures the action is value maximizing means.
Action taken by Malaysia in this case, it is assured by the legal means it pursued in the international court of justice (ICJ)
Through this paradigm of foreign policy we could see the systematic and rational decisions made by the states as the primary actor of analysis.
Also gives a clear picture on how decisions are made in a complete and professional manner at national levels.