For National Conference on Natural Science in UNESA January 14, 2017

National Conference of Natural Sciences Education: The Using of Electronic Assessment and the Results of Natural Sciences Researches for Researchers and Lecturers towards the Challengings of MEA, Saturday, January 14, 2017 in Universitas Negeri Surabaya

“The Concept ofSharing Knowledge and Informationof Research Results in Modern MEA”

Jeanne Francoise, S.Hum., M.Si.(Han.)

Professional Researcher

Abstract

This paper, that would be presented on National Conference of Natural Sciences Education: The Using of Electronic Assessment and the Results of Natural Sciences Researches for Researchers and Lecturers towards the Challengings of Masyarakat Ekonomi ASEAN (MEA), Saturday, January 14, 2017 in Universitas Negeri Surabaya, offers an hyphotesis that ASEAN needs a more modern concept of sharing knowledge by taking lessons fromU.S.A. failed digital information historyand also by choosing the cooperation with other ASEAN countries as strategic partnership in natural sciences education.

            This paper using two concepts; First is the definition of Modernism from French sociologist, Alain Tourraine and second is the Plato’s thought about Democracy and Liberty.Besides that, this paper also uses the Indonesian concept of dependability and interpendency towards national interest and intellegence, that is compacted inside our National Defense System (Sistem Pertahanan Negara/Sishanneg). The solutions on this paper may basically has some real strategic that can be implemented by the government of Indonesia in this digital era to facilitate the researchers and lecturers of using electronic assessment and the results of natural sciences researches, by preserving some boundaries of national defense information for the sake of Indonesian people and the security of ASEAN itself.

Keywords:Modern, Modernism, MEA, ASEAN, Asia, Indonesia

Historical background

Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a domestic organization in South East Asia which embraced all ten peace-loving countries. Actually, we are united not just because a reason of geographic, but because of our primer needs to be united and gain foes as human being. Thus brilliant idea was coming in the late 1960s, simultaneously with Cold War of superpower nations, Sexual Revolution in France, and a controversial Apartheid in South Africa. At that historic time, five prominent Asian leaders, Adam Malik of Indonesia, Narciso R. Ramos of the Philippines, Tun Abdul Razak of Malaysia, S. Rajaratnam of Singapore, and Thanat Khoman of Thailand, were meeting together in Department of Foreign Affairs Building in Bangkok, Thailand for signing a document of five articles, shaking hands together, and voilà ASEAN was born. Since it, ASEAN was declared as a regional organization which supports United Nations Charter, especially on peace keeping and peace building agendas.

It is preasummeably said that ASEAN was never design to be an united-defense regional body. ASEAN was existed based on the needs of security at that time. Nowadays, ASEAN is more than an international organization whose Secretary Office has an only role to maintain culture of peace of ASEAN people.

It is said that every multination’s organization has its urgent purpose, such as NATO with defense alliance program, Organization of Africa Unity (OAU) with economic independence program, or European Union (EU) with sharing profit program, but it is difficult to mention what is the main program of ASEAN today.

Since all of our leaders agreed that ASEAN was oriented on peace programs, nor in politics or army defense, ASEAN is focusing on cultural sharing, religious dialog, and improvement of technology. Today in 2009, an environmental sphere programs is added as a portion of Global Warming.

In the era of our mothers, there ASEAN students of natural science and technology got scholarships from Philippines and Singapore to do researches thing. After that, ASEAN religious leaders went from country to country speaking the religion as a mosaic of peace. Each year, in each ASEAN country, there was a huge cultural festival which performed dances, music, and cultural stand of ASEAN.

As a new generation, frankly I am disappointed because today there is a lack of cooperative programs between ASEAN countries, especially in educational needs. As a proof, ASEAN students are more interested of searching scholarships in Europe (Erasmus Mundus or Erasmus+), Australia (AUSAID), or America (USAID). Even the bureau of ASEAN in Jakarta, Indonesia has lack of festivals. I noticed that ASEAN’s education policy is not the number one anymore. ASEAN is more occupied with economic interest. As I read in magazines, cooperative programs are oriented in establishment of franchises (such as restaurants), building the hotels, and trade of naval equipments. All those programs are located under the ASEAN blueprint to avoid the bureaucracy, but all is about business.

Method of analysis

To analyze the problem that ASEAN having on interference policy, this paper citing the criticism from Plato against democracy that living in a democratic regime to give life each person to define himself, no one else has the right to tell us to live a certain way, each person is free to hold opinions and everyone is entitled to run the life he coveted.Deeper Plato's view that a democratic regime is a regime of market bazaar of Constitutions or laws. All kinds of rules used freely because it is considered suitable and fun all concerned to it, but with the use of a wide rules described in order of lawlessness.

In line with Plato, French sociologist, Alain Touraine, in his book Critique de la Modernité, has been critizing the concept of modernism while people is too much using the Internet by abandoning the values of being real and being honest. Also, he criticizes the Human Rights as a tool of human liberty without boundaries, while in morality, the respect itself depends on the social and political context, so it is a need to not to generalize Human Rights in close-minded perspectives just to find justification of wrong values.

Analysis

Before coming to the deeper analysis, I want to state that transferring knowledge and information of results of the researchs, within or outside MEA, is already a challenging action for ASEAN, because it means ASEAN threatens itself by sharing important of its capital and modality.

            By connecting of what Plato and Tourraine said about Democracy and Modernity, MEA itself is half-Democracy in the ASEAN defense system, because MEA has a role to make business more personal among ASEAN people and is designed to connect ASEAN people more closer than before. Because of it is tended to be more closer than before, so that Democracy to reject such sharing of knowlede and information of researchs results, is probably hard to do. While a country of ASEAN rejects sharing sharing of knowlede and information of researchs results of MEA, this country could be rejected by other countries, and then have big risk of its foreign relation economy.

            In the condition of sharing of knowledge and information of researchs resultsin MEA system, we must remember that each knowledge and information of research result has copyright, related to the respect of human rights (of the authors). In 2009, ASEAN has given institutional recognition to human rights, at its 15th summit held in Thailand in 2009 and the ASEAN inaugurated the ASEAN Intergovernmental Human Rights Commission (Baiq, p.9)

Indonesian Context

To connect Touraine and Plato to the concept of the modern Indonesian, it is good to re-look at the historical origins of Indonesia itself. Where did the idea Indonesian name? In his book, "The name of Indonesia: discovery Communist?", Mohammad Hatta trying to straighten history that the Indonesian word first used by J.R. Logan, an Englishman in 1850, long before a German, Bastian, write it down in 1884. Indonesia's experience in the conflict in the history of the kingdom of the archipelago and the colonial era became one of the Bung Hatta thought young to formulate the future of Indonesia into two concepts, " Freedom "and" Democracy ".

To complement the brilliant idea Mohammad Hatta, the authors propose the concept again, that "Modern Indonesia". Indonesia is independent, already a democracy, but not modern. Modernism and religion was as separateda priori because it is assumed that modern man is synonymous with secularism. But it is where the peculiarities of Indonesia. Indonesia may be modern, but it can never be a religious state because of the fact that Indonesia has a religious identity that is different, even the author has friends who hold religious beliefs "Sedulur Sikep" unrecognized in the Act.

Indonesia, which became modern Indonesia which means it does not mean to forget religion. Indonesia precisely modern Indonesia increasingly religious and increasingly religious practices were increasingly raised the real life of honor and human dignity. But to get a sense of religion that is good as it is, Indonesia faces the challenge of a democratic system.

To be modern Indonesia, Indonesia must dare to think further than other nations and become a pioneer religious state has the perspective of religion that lifts the honor and dignity of the human being as an individual that modern it actually never use religious reasons to suppress, compare, degrading the honor, much less deadly human dignity.

Indonesia conditions that modern religion not as the end of the Order of the Templars, not like the unification of West Germany and East Germany, and not like the election of President Salvador Allende in Chile. Indonesia is Indonesia. In the case of modern Indonesia, disseminating religious flavor that lifts the honor and human dignity, then Indonesia can start with cheap capital, the holding of an official statement of 5 (five) pages,succinctly discussed by thinkers of modern Indonesia, addressed from the President. The speech then became the official introduction Focus Group Discussion inviting all parties to formulate the Law on Sharing Knowledge and Information of Research Results of MEA.

Additional value in this essay is modernism as an understanding that is deeply entrenched in every civilization, because religion is central to the response to the social changes that exist through extensive knowledge and understanding of the better life, because sciences is made to make people’s life getting more easier.

Perhaps Plato does not know that in the concept of Sistem Pertahanan Negara Indonesia, Indonesian always regards Pancasila as the backbone of Democracy. Pancasila is also a filter to choose Democracy model and Modernity thoughts, so that transferring knowledge and information of research results within MEA must be followed by the clear National Law mentioning that procedures. Each transferring knowledge and information process of research result is part of Indonesian Intelligence social capital for the sake of indonesian people. Once the knowledge and information of research result is transferred, one part of Indonesian defense body is being also transferred. Remember, nowadays, globalization of political system has been modernised to face non-state actors and non-conventional threats, that leading to the decision of non-military intervention (in the worst condition).

On the other hand, Indonesians are popular with its generousity, but regarding to the sharing values, I urges that Indonesia must be really careful to share everything. It is true that the mentality of archipelago states must be open, not to create a border, but by being open-minded, does not mean by doing open-sharing intelligence data. Badan Intelijen Negara (Indonesian National Intelligence Unit) has a significant role to prevent such conflict of interest among ASEAN members and for Indonesians researcher themselves.

To prevent intelligence conflict, as the bad effect of sharing system in MEA, this paper has some recommendations. Firstly is ASEAN must be defined once more with clear statut of MEA and its limit of sharing Democracy values of each countries. Second is that by measuring the impact of such transferring knowledge and information of research result for the sake of ASEAN people. If it is felt that the sharing is dangerous, than it is wise to reject the sharing. Third is by focussing on economic sector. If countries other than ASEAN needs MEA’s transferring knowledge and information of research result, it is better to know first the historical background of each politic, so that ASEAN could be more careful to choose partners.

Finally the last recommendation is by knowing clearly who are the researchers, who are they, where they are coming from, and to whom they are working for, because the product (or research) of their researchers is also regarded as a new threat. Please remember Edward Snowden and Wikileaks cases. This is why I can conclude that BIN needs more intelligent people who understand deeply about ASEAN/MEA system, social sciences, and military role.

Conclusion

The other challenge for ASEAN is that ASEAN is not part of ROs. If European Union has NATO, ASEAN does not have any unity-military action, nor political judgement to deliver military intervention if there is a lawsuit against false conduct of transferring knowledge and information of research results within MEA. Considering of that challegings and limitations of ASEAN soft-diplomacy, this paper urges all ASEAN bodies to continue their best efforts to re-design the objectives of its foundation, while there must be a high level conference of ASEAN leaders to meet each other to discuss more about the future of ASEAN geopolitics, that must be more united and more integrated to prevent such conflict of interest in ASEAN. This agenda of integrity, including Transferring Knowledge and Information of Resarch Results of MEA, must be included on ASEAN Charter more clearly.

Wallâhu’l-Muwaffiq ilâ Aqwami at-Tharîq.

Bibliography

Barton, Greg. 2010. Indonesia: Legitimacy, Secular Democracy, and Islam, Politics&Policy, Volume 38, No.3 (2010), Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Boellstorff, Tom. 2005. Between Religion and Desire: Being Muslim and Gay in Indonesia, American Antrophologist, Dec 2005, 107, 4 , Arts&Humanities Database, pg.575.

Buku Putih Pertahanan Indonesia. (2008). Jakarta: Departemen Pertahanan Republik Indonesia.

Buku Doktrin Pertahanan Indonesia. (2007). Jakarta: Departemen Pertahanan Republik Indonesia.

Candland, Christopher. 2000. Faith as Social Capital: Religion and Community Development in Southern Asia, Policy Sciences, Dec 2000, 33, 3; Technology Collection. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Cobban, Alfred. 1970. A History of Modern France. Great Britain: Penguin Books Ltd.

Formichi, Chiara. 2015. Re(Writing) the History of Political Islam in Indonesia, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia Vol.30, No.1 (2015), pp.105-40.

Hellwig, Tineke. 2011. Abidah El Khalieqy’s novels: Changing patriarchal Islam. Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal, Land –en Volkenkunde.

Huda, 2014, “K.H. Wahid Hasyim”.

Keating, Michael. 1993. The Politics of Modern Europe. Great Britain: Edward Elgar Publishing Company.

Kersten, Ph.D, Carool. Islam, Cultural Hybridity and Cosmopolitanism: New Muslim Intellectuals on Globalization. London: Kings College.

Kiswanto, 2010, “Ulama”.

Kull, Ann. 2009. At the Forefront of a Post-Patriarchal Islamic Education Female Teachers in Indonesia, Journal of International Women’s Studies, Vol.11 #1 November 2009.

Laffan, Michael. 2004. An Indonesian Community in Cairo: Continutiy and Change in a Cosmopolitan Islamic Milieu.

Laporan KKDN PCR Cohort II T.A.2013. Sentul: Universitas Pertahanan Indonesia.

Mangunjaya, Dr. Fachruddin. 2014. Ekopesantren: Bagaimana Merancang Pesantren Ramah Lingkungan?. Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.

Manullang, Dr.A.C. (2002). Terorisme dan Perang Intelijen (Behauptung Ohne Beweis-Dugaan Tanpa Bukti). Jakarta: Penerbit Manna Zaitun.

Mayne, Richard. 1972. Europe Tomorrow: 16 Europeans Look Ahead. London: Fontana.

Munir, Lily Zakiyah. 2002. “He is your garment and you are his...”: Religious Percepts, Interpretations, and Power Relations in Marital Sexuality among Javanese Muslim Women, Sojourn Vol.17 No.2 (2002), pp.191-220.

Nano, BrigJen (Purn) Makmur Supriyatno. (2014). Tentang Ilmu Pertahanan. Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.

Navarro-Castro, Loreta&Jasmin Nario-Galace. 2010. Peace Education: A Pathway to a Culture of Peace. Philippines: Center for Peace Education, Miriam College.

Octavia, 2014, “Pesantren”.

Rahemtulla, Shadaab H. 2007. Master Thesis “Reconceptualizing The Contemporary Ulama: Al-Azhar, Lay Islam, and The Egyptian State in The Late Twentieth Century”, Master of Arts, Department of History, Simon Fraser University.

Ramakrishna, Kumar. 2005. Delegitimizing Global Jihadi Ideology in Southeast Asia, Contemporary Southeast Asia 27, no.3 (2005): 343-69.

Sakwa, Richard&Anne Stevens. 2000. Contemporary Europe. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Save the Children&PRIO. Education for Peace: Building Peace and Transforming Armed Conflict Through Educaiton Systems. Norway: PRIO.

Singer, Peter Warren. 2006. America, Islam, and the 9-11 War, Current History, Dec 2006, 105, 695; ProQuest, pg. 415.

Story, Jonathan (ed.). 1993. Albert Bressand, “The 1992 Breaktrough and the Global Economic Integration Agenda”, The New Europe: Politics, Government and Economy since 1945. UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Thody, Philip. 1997. An Historical Introduction to the European Union. New York: Routledge.

Zinirra, 2013, “Peran dan pengaruh kyai pesantren”.

Website BIN, 2014

Website Kemenag RI, 2015

Website NU Online, 2010