pasukangeraktjepat
New Member
thanks for the clarification.
Indonesia: 'green water navy'
- Thread starter Supe
- Start date
Ananda
The Bunker Group
3 Submarine deal with Daewoo signed
Long term process for Indonesian Submarine acquisition seems closed. From Yonhap News Agency : S. Korean shipbuilder signs largest-ever defense export deal | YONHAP NEWS
Basically the deal stipulated that the first and the second subs will be build in Daewoo yard, while the third will be build in PT. PAL yard in Surabaya. The technical Technology Transfer (ToT) mechanics is being discussed, but will included the help from DMSE for PT. PAL to help build Submarine manufacturing facility in Surabaya.
In short, this deal will be similar between Pakistan and French during acquisition of 3 Agosta Subs.
Long term process for Indonesian Submarine acquisition seems closed. From Yonhap News Agency : S. Korean shipbuilder signs largest-ever defense export deal | YONHAP NEWS
And this is from Indonesian Ministry of Defense site: Kemhan RI - DSME Korea Selatan Tandatangani Kontrak Pengadaan Kapal Selam
Basically the deal stipulated that the first and the second subs will be build in Daewoo yard, while the third will be build in PT. PAL yard in Surabaya. The technical Technology Transfer (ToT) mechanics is being discussed, but will included the help from DMSE for PT. PAL to help build Submarine manufacturing facility in Surabaya.
In short, this deal will be similar between Pakistan and French during acquisition of 3 Agosta Subs.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
More Info on Sub's Deal.
From Kompas English version : Indonesia Buying Submarines from S Korea on Technology Transfer Terms - KOMPAS.com
From Kompas English version : Indonesia Buying Submarines from S Korea on Technology Transfer Terms - KOMPAS.com
Seems there's misquote by the newsman. So far the info on the deal show the contract worth USD 1.08 bio and not USD 1.80 bio. From this information, it's clear that Indonesia (especially PT. PAL) opted the similar technical ToT deal as Pakistan done with the French on Agosta subs.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Youre right, all other sources talk about $1,07 to $1,1M...
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
A question. On the 16 August 2010, Indonesia Defense Department, signed a deal with PT PAL Indonesia and Damen Schelde to build a 105 meters frigate in Indonesia based on Damen Schelde Sigma 10514 design.
What is the status of this project? Will Koninklijke Schelde deliver the SIGMA 10514 vessel(s), will it be build at PT PAL, or will PT PAL only build the PKR 105/Korvet Nasional by themselves in Surabaya?
Some sources claimes the order consists of four vessels, some sources do not mention the amount of the ships.
What is the status of this project? Will Koninklijke Schelde deliver the SIGMA 10514 vessel(s), will it be build at PT PAL, or will PT PAL only build the PKR 105/Korvet Nasional by themselves in Surabaya?
Some sources claimes the order consists of four vessels, some sources do not mention the amount of the ships.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
A Indonesian newsarticle about the defence budget for the next five years!
"Sea Rider, kapal patroli cepat, kapal perusak, hidro oceanic serta kapal latih untuk pengganti KRI Dewaruci"....-> kapal persusak=destroyer???maybe they are meaning some sort of frigate like the SIGMA 10514, but how many they want to buy?
Hopefully they dont spend too much for the replacement of the KRI Dewaruci. TNI-AL can defend and protect our country without an unarmed sailboat in their fleet.
Complete article at : Kemhan miliki Rp150 triliun untuk persenjataan - AntaraNews.com
"Sea Rider, kapal patroli cepat, kapal perusak, hidro oceanic serta kapal latih untuk pengganti KRI Dewaruci"....-> kapal persusak=destroyer???maybe they are meaning some sort of frigate like the SIGMA 10514, but how many they want to buy?
Hopefully they dont spend too much for the replacement of the KRI Dewaruci. TNI-AL can defend and protect our country without an unarmed sailboat in their fleet.
Not sure I understood your question correctly but Australia's policy has always been to ensure that the ADF maintains a technological edge over South East Asian countries. Australia's main concern at the moment however is China.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
What the Indonesian Armed Forces including the Navy wants right now:
1. Provide sufficient number to patrol Indonesian Teritory (which is quite huge) with the amount of budget available
2. Trying to catch-up in technological term with the development in the region,
3. Try (and this is very political consideration) to build their weapons system as much as possible locally with Tech Transfers.
Try to ballance that, sometimes create compromise, let alone the mudling by those 520 'idiots' in Parliament thanks to 'democracy'.
For example, the deal of 3 Type 209 subs with ROK. With the available budget, yes they can get 2 more sophisticated subs like Scorpene, or Russian Kilo's or Amur/Lada. However the ROK willing to help local Shipyard (PAL) to build the Subs manufacturing capabilities. Thus eventhough Type 209 in this deal will not provide significant tech leap from existing 209, but it will provide Indonesia with the chances to build the local submarine manufacturing capablities.
In short, yes what Australian has will influence what Indonesia will try to have, but also what the Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, China, India, etc have. Indonesia teritory provide 3 very important sea lanes in the region, thus what everyone else in the region have, will definetely provide Influence on what Indonesia try to have or try to catch-up.
eldef
New Member
Indonesia is the largest archipelagic state in the region, so it should be the main actor or primus inter pares in south east asia's maritime issues. But i think it will be difficult due to lack of maritime vision and policies during these days. I think Indonesia should be leading in Naval strength in quality and quantity among those SEA countries. Australia ? hmm.. it will be difficult to make an ally because they consider indonesia as a threat from the north as well as china
Ananda
The Bunker Group
On Par with newer regional subs ?
Recently overhaul Type 209 Nenggala claimed to have capabilities 'on-par' with newer SEA Neighbor Subs : RI submarines on par with neighbors after overhaul | The Jakarta Post
From local blogs (alutsista.blogspot), the blog author claimed the new CMS (Combat Mgt System) used by Nenggala originated from Norwegia :ALUTSISTA : ALAT UTAMA SISTEM SENJATA: Nanggala Mengaplikasi Teknologi Sistem Pertempuran Norwegia
Recently overhaul Type 209 Nenggala claimed to have capabilities 'on-par' with newer SEA Neighbor Subs : RI submarines on par with neighbors after overhaul | The Jakarta Post
Basically the Indonesian Navy claimed their recently overhaul Type 209 now have capabilities for sub-launch missiles and better electronics/sensors that made them 'on-par' with newer neighbors subs.
From local blogs (alutsista.blogspot), the blog author claimed the new CMS (Combat Mgt System) used by Nenggala originated from Norwegia :ALUTSISTA : ALAT UTAMA SISTEM SENJATA: Nanggala Mengaplikasi Teknologi Sistem Pertempuran Norwegia
I am not an Australian so I do not pretend to speak for any of the people down under but as an outside observer I think you have two misperceptions.
First is that Indonesia should be primus in south East Asia’s maritime issues. That it is important in these affairs and will always be important in them is obvious to all but being primus (the leading actor) hinges on many more factors than just geography alone. The most important ones are the amount and kinds of uses of the resource and the willingness to bring safety and security to all that commonly use the resource. Things like weather information, accurate surveys, navigational aids, search & rescue, and emergency medical services as well as maintaining general law and order. Only then can one claim to be the leading actor.
Second, once again as an outside observer, it seems to most of the world that Australia is not afraid of Indonesia nor is it acting like it is afraid of Indonesia. Thou the history between the two as seen through Australian eyes, of just how many of Indonesia’s policies and actions have often haven been judged as detrimental Australian interests is easy to see. Even if those policies were not designed first with Australia in mind. Beginning first with WW II and Indonesia’s independence movement. I will not list all of the policies and positions. It would serve no good purpose and there are always two sides to any story and it is all in the past anyway but they are there in the history.
What Australia is worried by is just two things. First, that once again the Indonesian government will become unstable and thus once again become unpredictable. And the second is that some day in the future it might allow some bigger and stronger power, which will go unnamed, to use its territory to threaten Australia in exchange for becoming a minor partner in come kind of new kind of Asia co-prosperity sphere.
Indonesia has been making a great deal of progress lately and doing so on many fronts becoming stronger and more modern all the time and we all hope that it continues to do so. If it does continue to make the same kinds of progress as it has for the last fifteen years, then it is very possible that Australia could become a strong ally of Indonesia in the future by sharing many of the same values. Until then it will hedge its bets and see what happens.
Assuming the Indonesian economy would be able to support such a policy, is there the political will and is there really a need? I understand Indonesia wanting to maintain a dominant position, politically, in the region but in the naval/maritime sense?
To what purpose should Indonesia be the leading naval power in the region? Doesn't it has other more pressing issues to attend to?
Australia's past perceptions of Indonesia are linked to the days of the Konfrotasi, and the threat posed by Indonesia [on paper] to the region during that period. As you're aware, relations between both countries have undergo a rapid shift since East Timor, and also due to a common threat posed by terrorism [which saw Indonesia benefit in the form of assistance], Australia sees Indonesia as a partner, not as a threat.
eldef
New Member
Hi rip, thank you very much for your reply... it's an honor
If only they have many factors such as you've already said above and supported by their larger maritime areas compare to those in the region I think It can be the leading actor
Yes.. I totally agree 100% with you.. that's why I said it will be difficult because they (Indonesian) have lack of maritime vision and policies.
If only they have many factors such as you've already said above and supported by their larger maritime areas compare to those in the region I think It can be the leading actor
I'm not an Australian also.. Australia is a big country with big military forces, so I dont think they are afraid to any nation in SEA. But in my point of view the Indonesian-Australian relationship is not always well maintained due to some issues such as east timor, papua, terrorism etc. so that's why I think it will be difficult to make an ally. But if these two can become partner in the future it will be a great deal for region's stability
eldef
New Member
Hello my brother, thank's for your reply.
This is only a discussion to expand my naval & maritime knowledge so please dont take it personally
Indonesia should have bigger naval strength compare to those in South East Asia (SEA) because they have bigger maritime areas to handle than any other countries in SEA, so it makes sense if they should have better(quantity) and bigger(quality) naval strength, not for invasion purpose.. it's only for maintaining their longest sea boundaries
This is only a discussion to expand my naval & maritime knowledge so please dont take it personally
Well I think there are only minor or partial political will in Indonesia, not a global or long term political policies such as singapore and malaysia (they have better or maybe the best maritime policy in SEA).
Indonesia should have bigger naval strength compare to those in South East Asia (SEA) because they have bigger maritime areas to handle than any other countries in SEA, so it makes sense if they should have better(quantity) and bigger(quality) naval strength, not for invasion purpose.. it's only for maintaining their longest sea boundaries
Gadjah Mada
New Member
Indonesia should have bigger naval strength compare to those in South East Asia (SEA) because they have bigger maritime areas to handle than any other countries in SEA, so it makes sense if they should have better(quantity) and bigger(quality) naval strength, not for invasion purpose.. it's only for maintaining their longest sea boundaries[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Indonesia is the largest archipelagic state in the world, and so far our navy could not cover the entire maritime area.
Historically Indonesian Navy is relatively "clean" from politics, unlike our Air Force which was considered leaning left during the Sukarno era or the army during Suharto era. I do not know exactly whether this has made lack of political support for navy strengthening in the past. I am just a fanboy
However since the reformation era, some MP showed more support on maritime development, including the Navy, and less attention was given to the army. So far the navy has plan to induct more missile patrol boats which is considered more suitable for Indonesian sea and also low operating cost. Other reason, many Indonesian dockyard are able to produce such boats, thus reducing the risk of embargo. For the missile itself, the navy has plan to use C-705 from PRC with probability of producing under license.
Regarding Australia, I never heard that their development would bother us. In public opinion, what they buy never drew any attention to Indonesian public, even though sometime some MP showed their concern, such as USMC deployment in Darwin or their view on Papua. Indonesia have no financial capability to match anything Australia can buy. That`s why we are grateful for the Hercules gift.
Most concern in Indonesia is actually Malaysia. We lost Sipadan and Ligitan through ICJ in 2002. We have disputes in some sea borders. While most Indonesian still try to learn to accept this situation, problems in Ambalat occured, and also the detainment of three Indonesian officials in Riau border by Malaysian authority. This Malaysia card is actually what is played for demanding higher military expenditure. Even the Army Chief of Staff used this card for convincing the parliament for allowing them to acquire MBT and MLRS more capable than Malaysia have.
In the hand of different politicians, these hot spots in our border could be another story.
The Navy also have plan to build naval base in Central Sulawesi, close to the disputed Ambalat area, and protect the resource rich Indonesian Borneo, especially East Kalimantan which is the richest province in Indonesia.
Other than anti-terrorism mission, Indonesia never sent any military contingent for combat purpose outside its border, except during konfrontasi and East Timor Invasion. We only send peacekeeping force. It is written in our constitution. Thus, I do not think Indonesian military, including the navy will build strength beyond our needs and beyond our financial capability. That`s why they make minimum essential force concept.
Agreed. Indonesia is the largest archipelagic state in the world, and so far our navy could not cover the entire maritime area.
Historically Indonesian Navy is relatively "clean" from politics, unlike our Air Force which was considered leaning left during the Sukarno era or the army during Suharto era. I do not know exactly whether this has made lack of political support for navy strengthening in the past. I am just a fanboy
However since the reformation era, some MP showed more support on maritime development, including the Navy, and less attention was given to the army. So far the navy has plan to induct more missile patrol boats which is considered more suitable for Indonesian sea and also low operating cost. Other reason, many Indonesian dockyard are able to produce such boats, thus reducing the risk of embargo. For the missile itself, the navy has plan to use C-705 from PRC with probability of producing under license.
Regarding Australia, I never heard that their development would bother us. In public opinion, what they buy never drew any attention to Indonesian public, even though sometime some MP showed their concern, such as USMC deployment in Darwin or their view on Papua. Indonesia have no financial capability to match anything Australia can buy. That`s why we are grateful for the Hercules gift.
Most concern in Indonesia is actually Malaysia. We lost Sipadan and Ligitan through ICJ in 2002. We have disputes in some sea borders. While most Indonesian still try to learn to accept this situation, problems in Ambalat occured, and also the detainment of three Indonesian officials in Riau border by Malaysian authority. This Malaysia card is actually what is played for demanding higher military expenditure. Even the Army Chief of Staff used this card for convincing the parliament for allowing them to acquire MBT and MLRS more capable than Malaysia have.
In the hand of different politicians, these hot spots in our border could be another story.
The Navy also have plan to build naval base in Central Sulawesi, close to the disputed Ambalat area, and protect the resource rich Indonesian Borneo, especially East Kalimantan which is the richest province in Indonesia.
Other than anti-terrorism mission, Indonesia never sent any military contingent for combat purpose outside its border, except during konfrontasi and East Timor Invasion. We only send peacekeeping force. It is written in our constitution. Thus, I do not think Indonesian military, including the navy will build strength beyond our needs and beyond our financial capability. That`s why they make minimum essential force concept.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Could you elaborate further on that ? Don't mixed vision and policies with availability of resources. These days Naval procurement budget is higher than the Army procurement budget. And it had been so since even on the 90's in Soeharto era. And if you say it's not enough, well because Indonesia did not have enough resources to cover all the maritime areas that she has.
There's political will to do it, but not enough resources to cover what needed soon. So don't mix between vision and policies with resources. Indonesia Economy/GDP is much larger than what Singapore and Malaysia have combine for example, but so does Indonesia problem which's humongous compared to what Malaysia and Singapore and even all Asean combine. Social costs such as subsidies, poverty allocation, infrastructure etc for one year alone are larger than combine Defense expenditure for five years. But they need to be done to maintain social stability which is more crucial to Indonesia than potential external military threats.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
That's probably true for the Air Force for the first 5 to 10 years of Soeharto in power, but I don't think that's the reasons after that. Many in Indonesia bashing Soeharto for not building the Air Force and the Navy to the relative level of Soekarno's early 60's. But I believe they forgot few things:Historically Indonesian Navy is relatively "clean" from politics, unlike our Air Force which was considered leaning left during the Sukarno era or the army during Suharto era. I do not know exactly whether this has made lack of political support for navy strengthening in the past. I am just a fanboy
1. Building the Air Force is very expensive. After Soekarno, Indonesia do not have supplier like USSR that will provide relative 'under the market price' for Fighters and other assets need to developed Air Force. In the 70's we have to relied with second hand give away from Australian and US such as T-33 and Sabre.
2. Soeharto did build the Air Force. By the time second oil boom happen, Soeharto did spend for F-5, OV-10 and A-4 in which in quantitative sides, the Air Force by the 80's did come back to 60%-70% of their number strength compared to their height in the 60's. That also true for the Navy in which by that era Soeharto due build much of what (still) backbones of the Navy like Van Speijk Frigates, Type 209 subs, Taking most of East German Navy, etc.
3. Don't forgot the corruption in Indonesia when buying the Armaments. Those 40 Hawk 109/209 bought in the 90's costs the same with 40 F-16 or F-18. The high cost being given as 'commission' to Soeharto's children. Nowadays, the corruption still there, but hopefully much less or become much more difficult to conduct for Armament procurement due to more open practices.
4. In short, Soeharto did spend more in Air Force and Naval procurement in term of Rupiah/Dollar, then he spend on Army Procurement. So it's not true he does not have vision for Air and Maritime defense, it's just he can't spend more money on Naval and Air Defense then the need called for.
5. And the last thing, Since Soeharto until current President SBY, they choose to keep the Defense Expenditures very low compared to GDP. On Average since Soeharto era, Indonesia's Defense expenditure are in the area of 1% of GDP (at most less than 2% in some years). This much different than Soekarno's in the 60's during Trikora and Konfrontasi that can reach more than 25% of GDP. After Soekarno, the ruling regimes choose to spend more on social costs and economic development, which they (correctly) believe will keep them in power more, rather than building defense. This year they spend close to USD 8 billion on defense, which is the highest for long time. But still it's only 1% of GDP.
That's the price of Democracy. The politicians (let alone the low quality politicians that make majority of Parliament these days) need to be seen as 'active' and full of bravado for their parties agenda, even though the result showing them more 'idiots' then they already low level of IQ.
But hey, blame to all Indonesians, why those Idiots can be went to Parliament. After all we choose them in the ballot box. Thats' mean, either we (as majority voters in Indonesia) do not really care with Politics, or we just simply more 'idiot's in such that can be dupe by 'idiot's politicians.
Gadjah Mada
New Member
4. In short, Soeharto did spend more in Air Force and Naval procurement in term of Rupiah/Dollar, then he spend on Army Procurement. So it's not true he does not have vision for Air and Maritime defense, it's just he can't spend more money on Naval and Air Defense then the need called for.
I think what people saw is not entirely about the money. It is more about the policy. During the Suharto era, all the Panglima TNI came from the army, while since the reformation era it has been rotated among the three branches of the military. It gave the impression that the navy and air force main task was to support the army. The main role was left mainly to the army. During the last days of Sukarno, the army, navy, and air force were separated.
That's the price of Democracy. The politicians (let alone the low quality politicians that make majority of Parliament these days) need to be seen as 'active' and full of bravado for their parties agenda, even though the result showing them more 'idiots' then they already low level of IQ.
But hey, blame to all Indonesians, why those Idiots can be went to Parliament. After all we choose them in the ballot box. Thats' mean, either we (as majority voters in Indonesia) do not really care with Politics, or we just simply more 'idiot's in such that can be dupe by 'idiot's politicians.
[/QUOTE]Human Development Index of Indonesian is one of the lowest in ASEAN. What kind of politician do you expect they will elect?
eldef
New Member
Dear sir/madam
Political will only is not enough, if they got the will then they should make some policies to strengthen the Navy, not only navy but every stake holder related to maritime’s area.
Talking without action is nonsense… Yes, building the navy will cost much but this is not something that have to be done in 1 or 2 years.. it is a long term process ( such as 10 or 20 years ) so don’t only based on the budget but imagine the advantage if you have strong navy : there will be no sea violation, your natural resources will be secure, your people should not worries about looking fo a job (first you should change people mind from “land minded” to “sea/maritime minded”.. there’re plenty of opportunity in the sea), your neighbour will think twice to do some provocative action near the border or in your sea teritory, it will support the social stability.
It is understandable if the government still pay more attention to Social costs such as subsidies, poverty allocation, infrastructure etc, it’s their choice based on their policies. But of course the impact is it will be difficult to have enough resources to maintain maritime area, it’s natural.