Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKBetween 2000-2005 period, Malaysia intensively conducting efforts in increasing its military capacity. The country quick recovery from 1997 economic crisis made it possible for this step. On the other hand, Indonesia economic condition yet to recover. This have caused the imbalance of military strenght between both countries. In fact, between Southeast Asian countries, Indonesia defense budgetsare the lowest in the region. With this recognition, along with the increasing amount of security problems faced by Indonesia, this country then consistenly pursue numerous actions in order to fill thegap in the military posture. Slowly, the nation?s defense budget are increased to achieve this objective. But in the process, the military build-up by Indonesia, and Malaysia, appear to shadows the bilateral relations. Each country military build-up actions, are always followed by the other. By few, these trend could induce arms race between Indonesia and Malaysia. The relationship of two nations seems to support this view. Bilateral relations between Indonesia dan Malaysia, historically, cannot be said free from troubles. Until today, there are still numerous issues hampering Indonesia-Malaysia relations, suchas border disputes over several outstanding border problems in Kalimantan, dan the lattest, the ambalat case in 2005. Through depht analysis, the view of arms race between Indonesia and Malaysia, areproven wrong. Beside the absence of hostile intentions, the domestic factors are the biggest reason for Indonesia to achieve better military strenght. This reasons include the increasing transnational crimes activities in Indonesia territorial?s dan modernization of military weaponry for the quest of deterrence capability. FromIndonesia perspective, Malaysia military modernization did not triger the actions. On the other hand, Malaysia military modernization mostly affected by ?Singapore factor?, rather than Indonesia. This shows that the military capability improvement by both countries are cannot be characterize as an arms race. The motives are alsoabsolutely far from competition. Nevertheless, both countries actions in enhancing its military capability, have had an impact for the region. Despite the internal motives and the moderat characterizationof both military build-up, increasing defense budget that followed by weapons purchasing have triger other countries in the region to take the same steps. In the context of good neighbour principles and the importance of confidence and trust building, the enhancement of military capability supposedly conducted in full transparency and openness attitude. And, in order to prevent any disturbance to thepeace and security in Southeast Asia, then, military capability enhancement must be taken in a moderate manner. "

"Cina sebagai negara yang terluas wilayahnya di Asia, terus melakukan terobosan politik maupun ekonomi. Termasuk di dalamnya pembangunan militer dan moderenisasi persenjataan militer guna mempertahankan kedaulatan negaranya. Peningkatan pembangunan militer Cina mengundang banyak perhatian disertai dengan rasa kekhawatiran negara-negara Asia Timur maupun Asia Tenggara akan kemungkinanan Cina muncul sebagai negara adikuasa baru di bidang militer di kawasan Asia. Kekhawatiran tersebut tidak hanya dad negara-negara Asia semata melainkan negara Amerika Serikat ikutserta di dalamnya, sehingga strategi yang dijalankan Amerika Serikat adalah melakukan penyeimbangan kekuatan militer Cina dengan menghadirkan armada kapal-kapal perang Amerika Serikat di parairan Jepang dan Korea Selatan yang semata untuk membatasi ruang gerak Cina khususnya di kawasan Asia Timur.Hipotesis : "Jika peningkatan pembangunan militer RRC bertujuan membangun kekuatan regional utama di Asia Timur, maka strategi Amerika Serikat di Asia Timur diarahkan untuk memperkuat aliansi kerjasama dengan negara-negara Asia Timur, ditandai dengan adanya dukungan dari Jepang dan Korea Selatan terhadap peningkatan peranan Amerika Serikat di Asia Timur".Hasil uji hipotesis dengan menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif, bahwa pembangunan militer Cina telah mengundang perhatian serius dari Amerika Serikat terutama setelah Cina berhasil melakukan uji coba nuklirnya di Pasifik Selatan, sehingga Amerika Serikat merasa perlu untuk memperkuat aliansi kerjasama pertahanan dan keamanan di Asia Timur dengan negara sekutunya yaitu Jepang dan Korea Selatan, Berta menjadikan Taiwan sebagai wilayah satelit Amerika Serikat untuk memantau kekuatan militer Cina.Berdasarkan uji hipotesis, dapat menarik kesimpulan bahwa, strategi Amerika Serikat di kawasan Asia Timur pada umumnya masih mempertahankan status quo yaitu membendung kemungkinan meluasnya pengaruh militer Cina di Asia Timur, menyadari kenyataan tersebut, Amerika Serikat merasa perlu untuk membangun strategi guna membatasi ruang gerak Cina di kawasan Asia Timur bersama-sama dengan Jepang dan Korea Selatan.

---

Chinese as wide state of its region in Asia, continue to conduct economic and also political breakthrough. Including in it development of and military of modernism military weaponry utilize to maintain sovereignty of state. Make-up of development of Chinese military invite many focus accompanied felt care of Asian nations of East and also South-East Asia of Chinese forever emerge as state of main new in military area in Asian area. The Care do not only from Asian nations of eye but United States state take part in, so that run by strategy is United States is to do compensating of strength of Chinese military by attending United States battleships armada in Japan sea and South Korea which is eye to limit room move Chinese specially in Asian area of East"Hypothesis If make-up of development of military of RRC aim to develop strength of especial regional in Asia East, hence United States strategy in Asia East instructed to strengthen cooperation alliance with Asian nations of East, marked with existence of support of Japan and South Korea to make-up of role of United States in Asia East".Result of hypothesis test by using method research of analytical descriptive, please find that development of Chinese military have invited serious attention of United States especially after Chinese made a success of its nuclear test-drive in Pacific South, so that United States feel important to strengthen defense cooperation alliance and security in Asia East with ally state that is Japan and South Korea, and also make Taiwan as United States satellite region to watch strength of Chinese military.Pursuant to hypothesis test, can conclude that, United States strategy in Asian area of East in general still maintain status quo that is barricading possibility the wide of influence of Chinese military in Asia East, realizing the fact, United States feel important to develop strategy utili2e to limit room move Chinese in Asian area of East together with Japan and South Korea."

"ABSTRAKFokus dari penelitian ini adalah untuk melihat dan mengetahui peningkatankapabilitas militer Indonesia dimulai dari periode tahun 2006 hingga tahun 2010sehubungan dengan adanya konflik Ambalat pada tahun tersebut. Hal ini dilakukandengan terlebih dahulu menjelaskan faktor-faktor yang membuat Indonesia meningkatkankapabilitas militer nya, pemahaman dan penjabaran yang terjadi seputar konflik Ambalatyang menjadi tolak ukur penulis dalam menganalisa peningkatan kapabilitas militerIndonesia. Lalu berlanjut pada melihat dan mengukur sejauh mana kapabilitas militerantara Indonesia dan Malaysia, dan melihat seberapa besar pengaruh dari kapabilitasmiliter Malaysia dapat mempengaruhi peningkatan militer Indonesia serta menganalisasejauh mana dinamika persenjataan diantara kedua negara tersebut.Melihat kapabilitasmiliter dari segi alutsista (alat utama sistem senjata), anggaran pertahanan, danmanpower.Penelitian ini dilakukan secara kualitatif dengan studi dokumen yang berkaitandinamika persenjataan Indonesia-Malaysia 2006 hingga 2008. Penelitian ini telahmembuktikan bahwa strategi deterrence yang dilakukan Indonesia merupakan upayauntuk mengimbangi kekuatan militer Malaysia dengan melakukan peningkatankapabilitas militernya. Dinamika Persenjataan dari kedua negara dapat dianalisis melaluiAction-Reaction model yang merupakan salah satu model dari "The Arms Dynamic"dimana dalam penelitian ini akan dibuktikan ke arah mana kecenderungan dari dinamikapersenjataan diantara kedua negara dan implikasi nya bagi Indonesia denganmenggunakan tiga indikator yaitu Timing, Magnitude, dan Awarness. Dampak positifkonflik Ambalat bagi Indoneisa adalah langkah awal Indonesia menjalankan modernisasimiliternya agar bisa mencapai kekuatan militer minimum yang bisa menjaga setiapwialayah Indonesia.

---

AbstractThe main focus of this research is to observe the improvement of Indonesian'smilitary capabilities starting from the period 2006 through 2010 in connection withAmbalat's conflict. At first, this research is explaining the factors that make Indonesiaimproves their military capabilities, understanding and elaboration that occur aroundthe conflict that because of Ambalat's conflict, authors analyze the increasing militarycapabilities in Indonesia. Then continue to observe and measure the arms build-upbetween Indonesia and Malaysia, and observe the influences factors of militarycapabilities may affect the arms build-up between Malaysia- Indonesia and analyze theextent the arms dynamic between the two countries military capabilities analyzed inaccordance defense equipment, major equipment systems weapons, the defense budget,and manpower.This research is descriptively conducted by studying documents related to thearms dynamic of Indonesia-Malaysia between the period of 2006 to 2010. This researchrevealed that the strategy of deterrence made Indonesia an attempt to counte rbalancethe military power of Malaysia by arms build-up on their military capabilities. The armsdynamics of the two countries can be analyzed through the Action-Reaction model whichin this research will reveal which way in the arms dynamic between the two countriesand observe the implications for Indonesia using three indicators, Timing , Magnitude,and Awarness. The positive impact of the Ambalat conflict for Indonesia is making theirfirst step to run their arms build-up and military modernization in order to achieve theminimum force that can stabilized of every teritory in Indonesia."

"Salah satu implikasi penerapan corporate governance yang lemah biasanya diukur dari rendahnya sensitivitas pengggantian manajemen terhadap kinerja perusahaan atau tetap dipertahankannya manajemen yang memiliki kinerja yang rendah (management entrenchment). Disamping itu, penerapan corporate governance sangat dipengaruhi oleh karakteristik dan lingkungan perusahaan berada. Penelitian ini bertujuan menilai implementasi GCG di BUMN khususnya tentang pengaruh kinerja perusahaan dan governance terhadap penggantian (turnover) direksi secara normal atau tidak normal. Mekanisme corporate governance yang akan diamati dalam penelitian ini adalah mekanisme internal yang diwakili oleh tingkat independensi direksi yang diproksikan dengan proporsi direksi yang berasal dari luar perusahaan (outside directors) dan struktur kepemilikan saham perusahaan, dan mekanisme cksternal yang diwakili olch interest politik dan pembiayaan hutang (leverage) perusahaan.Hasil yang diperoleh dalam penelitian ini adalah bahwa kinerja perusahaan adalah faktor yang berpengaruh dalam penggantian direksi BUMN dan tidak terbukti adanya management entrenchment. Terdapat bukti bahwa ukuran kinerja yang diuji yaitu return on sales digunakan oleh pemegang saham sebagai pertimbangan penggantian direksi dimana semakin tinggi kinerja ROS perusahaan, semakin besar kemungkinan perusahaan tersebut mengalami penggantian direksi secara normal. Hasil penelitian lain yang didapatkan adalah rendahnya pererapan GCG dalam proses penggantian direksi BUMN akibat beragamnya potensi konfik kepentingan di sekitar BUMN dimana terbukti bahwa outside directors dan faktor daya tarik politis justru mempengaruhi dilakukannya penggantian direksi secara tidak normal dan ketika kedua variabel ini diinteraksikan dengan variabel kinerja terlihat bahwa variabel kinerja bukan satu-satunya faktor yang mempengaruhi penggantian direksi secara normal. Penelitian ini belum dapat menemukan bukti bahwa variabel struktur kepemilikan saham dan leverage perusahaan memiliki pengaruh atas penggantian direksi secara normal atau tidak normal

---

One of the implications of implementing weak corporate governance is usually measured by the low sensitivity of management waiting to company performance or the maintained management that has low performance (management entrenchment). In addition, the implementation of corporate governance is strongly influenced by the characteristics and environment of the company. This study aims to assess the implementation of GCG in SOEs, especially regarding the effect of company performance and governance on normal or abnormal turnover of directors. The corporate governance mechanism that will be observed in this study is an internal mechanism represented by the level of independence of the board of directors which is proxied by the proportion of directors who come from outside the company (outside directors) and the structure of the company's share ownership, and the cksternal mechanism represented by the political olch interest and debt financing (leverage) of the company.

The results obtained in this study are that the company's performance is an influential factor in replacing the directors of SOEs and there is no evidence of management entrenchment. There is evidence that the performance measure tested, namely return on sales, is used by shareholders as a consideration for the replacement of directors where the higher the company's ROS performance, the more likely the company is to experience normal board of directors replacement. Another research result obtained was the low application of GCG in the process of replacing SOE directors due to the diverse potential conflict of interests around SOEs where it was proven that outside directors and political attraction factors actually influenced the abnormal replacement of directors and when these two variables were interrogated with performance variables, it was seen that the performance variables were not the only factors that affected the normal replacement of directors. This study has not been able to find evidence that the variables of the shareholding structure and leverage of the company have an influence over the normal or abnormal replacement of directors."