FACILITATING TRI-BORDER MARITIME SECURITY

UNCLAS JAKARTA 002584 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS DEPT FOR EAP, EAP/MTS, EAP/MLS, EAP/RSP, INR/EAP, S/CT E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV MARR PREL PTER ID RP MY SUBJECT: FACILITATING TRI-BORDER MARITIME SECURITY ¶1. (U) This cable is Sensitive but Unclassified -- Please handle accordingly. ¶2. (U) SUMMARY: Delegations from Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines and observers from Brunei, Australia and the United States participated in a multilateral maritime security conference August 27-29 in Cebu, Philippines. The USPACOM-sponsored conference was successful in developing recommendations to overcome gaps in cooperation within and among tri-border countries in maritime security policy, operations and information sharing. END SUMMARY. ¶3. (SBU) The Joint Inter-Agency Coordination Group of the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM),with the assistance of a contracted Philippine NGO (Asia Pacific Security Forum), sponsored the conference, which included representatives from U.S. missions in the region and civilian-military delegations from Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia. Working groups developed recommendations in each area for application at national, bilateral and multilateral levels. There was broad acknowledgment of the need for better national interagency coordination of maritime efforts and for effective multilateral frameworks for working trilateral issues among countries. Delegations were surprised to learn that many bilateral agreements already existed to address cross-border security, although some were outdated. The Indonesian delegation offered to host the next conference in Indonesia in August, 2008. ¶4. (SBU) INTERAGENCY MECHANISMS: The conference structured working group sessions around the task of filling matrices containing a range of means and objectives pertaining to maritime security. Groups were asked to create solutions to operational problems. One recurrent variable was the presence of national interagency coordination. This was then translated into an assessment of existing institutions in the three countries. The Philippines' Coast Watch South, for example, was not yet operational. Indonesia's Bakorkamla (Maritime Security Coordinating Body) was just beginning to establish its role. The new Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) was still finding its way in implementing interagency cooperation. ¶5. (SBU) SEARCH FOR INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS: The exercises also highlighted the need for institutional structures to facilitate trilateral consultations. While no clear consensus emerged as to which policy structure was best, delegations frequently mentioned ASEAN's security framework (ARF/ASPC/SOMTC) as a possible model and the emerging Brunei-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines East Asia Growth Area (BIMP EAGA) as another. Other potential frameworks were the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Delegations also noted the need to operationalize the 2002 Agreement on Information Exchange and to ratify the 2007 ASEAN Convention on Counter Terrorism. ¶6. (SBU) COMMENT: The conference confirmed what we know about deficiencies in national interagency processes in participant countries and the need for better coordination among those same countries. The conference was targeted to highlight these needs, and participating delegations' awareness of them is a measure of its success. Embassy Kuala Lumpur's regional security initiative coordinator cleared this message. END COMMENT. HUME