Seingat saya, di dalam UNCLOS juga tertulis, koq,.... bahwa base-line harus berupa "natural" feature/land-mark, bukan "man-made" feature/landmark. Tidak seperti Pak Made Arsana yg kuatir, saya yakin "technical experts involved in the negotiation have been aware of this matter". Sejak 2003 (4 tahun yang lalu) ketika saya mewakili IAGI bicara di rapat2 khusus Dewan Maritim menyangkut soal batas Singapore-Indonesia dalam kaitan dg penambangan pasir di Riau BTW, saya melihat para ahli teknis dari Bakosurtanal, Dishidros, BPPT, DepLu dll sudah sangat "aware dengan masalah tersebut. Meskipun demikian salut juga buat usaha Pak Made Arsana yang melemparkan isu tersebut di media, supaya tetap membuat para ahli tersebut terjaga.
Thx untuk RDP yang posting beritanya Salam adb ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rovicky Dwi Putrohari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]>; "Himpunan Ahli Geofisika Indonesia (HAGI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 4:58 PM Subject: [iagi-net-l] Indonesia-Singapore talks on maritime borders making progress > Singapore berjanji tidak mengunakan "reclaimed" shoreline sebagai > batas claim... CATET dulu ... > Nah yang harus diperhatikan, peta yang mana (kapan) yang akan dipakainya ? > > rdp > ============================================== > Indonesia-Singapore talks on maritime borders making progress > > Opinion and Editorial - April 05, 2007 > > I Made Andi Arsana, Wollongong, Australia > > Indonesia and Singapore have been recently conducting serious talks > concerning their pending maritime boundary delimitation. The third > round of negotiations ended on March 29, with both delegations > declaring the discussions friendly and fruitful. > > Apart from formal negotiations that have been conducted by Indonesia > and Singapore regarding their maritime boundaries, Singapore, on the > other hand, has been actively reclaiming its shoreline. With regard to > this reclamation, there is a serious concern among people in Indonesia > that Singapore will use the reclaimed shoreline to decide its borders. > As I wrote in the Feb. 28, 2007, edition of The Jakarta Post, the > concern makes sense as such practices might be possible for Singapore, > in reference to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea > (UNCLOS). It is also supported by the statement in the Manual on the > Technical Aspects of the UNCLOS (TALOS). > > Several similar articles have been published, including one in The > Strait Times on March 17, 2007, titled Jakarta fears S'pore will use > reclaimed shoreline to decide border. > > After the third round of negotiations were completed in Singapore, the > said worry for the Indonesian side should now be unnecessary. It has > been clearly asserted by Singaporean Minister for Foreign Affairs > George Yeo that its land reclamation works are conducted within > Singapore's territorial waters. According to a spokesman, Singapore > has stated that land reclamations "would not be a factor in ongoing > maritime boundary negotiations with Indonesia". This statement was > made when Yeo spoke in Parliament on Feb. 12, 2007. > > Provided that Singapore is consistent with said statement, it shows > significant progress regarding the negotiations, at least from the > Indonesian perspective. The two neighboring states can now move onto > other essential issues to finalize the pending 1973 agreement. As > mentioned in their joint press release, the two states have agreed on > several technical issues for the delimitation of boundaries. This > should have been a productive achievement reached by the two > delegations. > > In addition, the joint statement said that the "two sides also > presented their views on the principles of delimitation to be used in > territorial sea boundary delimitation". However, it was not clearly > mentioned whether the views included technical aspects and options for > boundary lines to the west and east of the existing 1973 boundary > line. > > After observing the latest development in the Indonesia-Singapore > negotiations, there are at least two other issues to be considered. > The first issue regards the statement that Singaporean land > reclamation will have nothing to do with the ongoing negotiations. It > is worth recalling the principle of maritime boundary delimitation > that the construction of boundary line will involve the existence of a > baseline. In this regard, the change of the baseline will definitely > cause impact on maritime boundary delimitation. > > On the other hand, reclamation can be viewed as an action that could > possibly change the baselines. If it is confirmed that the reclamation > will not affect the delimitation of maritime boundaries, this means > that the delimitation will consider Singapore's original coastline > prior to reclamation. This should be treated as an important note to > both Indonesia and Singapore as it will consequently influence > technical aspects to consider. This, in particular, includes the > identification of geographical features depicted on a nautical chart > used in the delimitation. Geographical features shown on the nautical > chart used in delimitation must depict Singapore's original coastline. > Technical experts involved in the negotiation must have been aware of > this matter. > > The second issue concerns the use of geodetic datum in defining the > positions of border points. It should be noted that the 1973 agreement > does not specifically mention the geodetic datum used. In fact, the > coordinates of latitude and longitude without specific geodetic datum > tell us nothing. Such coordinates do not refer to any specific > location on earth, meaning that the maritime boundary lines they > delineate do not really exist. > > It is theoretically impossible to identify border crossing, for > example, without specific geodetic datum. A patrolling officer will > not be able to identity how long a ship has trespassed a boundary line > for since the boundary could not be precisely located in the field. In > such a case, the use of modern navigational aid such as a Global > Positioning System (GPS) would not help much as a GPS has specific > geodetic datum, while border points do not. > > Simply speaking geodetic datum is a frame by which coordinates are > defined and referenced on earth. It is therefore the responsibility of > the technical experts such as geodetic surveyors to avoid such > blunders in the ongoing maritime boundary negotiation. > > The two issues are probably only parts of all other issues to take > into account. The upcoming negotiation will be conducted in Indonesia, > where more other important concerns will be addressed. Let's see and > support delegations from the two neighboring states to achieve > equitable solutions for all parties. > > The writer is a lecturer at the Department of Geodesy and Geomatic > Engineering at Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta and currently a > UN-Nippon research fellow in Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea at > the Centre for Maritime Policy, University of Wollongong, Australia. > The views expressed here are his personal opinion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hot News!!! CALL FOR PAPERS: send your abstract by 30 March 2007 to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joint Convention Bali 2007 - The 32nd HAGI, the 36th IAGI, and the 29th IATMI Annual Convention and Exhibition, Bali Convention Center, 13-16 November 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to: iagi-net-unsubscribe[at]iagi.or.id To subscribe, send email to: iagi-net-subscribe[at]iagi.or.id Visit IAGI Website: http://iagi.or.id Pembayaran iuran anggota ditujukan ke: Bank Mandiri Cab. Wisma Alia Jakarta No. Rek: 123 0085005314 Atas nama: Ikatan Ahli Geologi Indonesia (IAGI) Bank BCA KCP. Manara Mulia No. Rekening: 255-1088580 A/n: Shinta Damayanti IAGI-net Archive 1: http://www.mail-archive.com/iagi-net%40iagi.or.id/ IAGI-net Archive 2: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iagi ---------------------------------------------------------------------
