ASEAN Digital Masterplan: Responding Cyber Security Dilemma in The Post-Covid Era
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought people to stay longer to disconnected from the face-to-face world than before and rely on the cyber domain daily. Because of the pandemic, Southeast Asia countries added a new 40 million internet users and in total 400 million internet users in the region. The new environment of interaction in the virtual domain generates the bipolarity of dominant power between the U.S and China to establish how cyberspace needs to regulate. The increasing penetration of internet users in the region creates an opportunity for ASEAN to establish ASEAN digital master plan that aims to accelerate region recovery from the pandemic through cyber cooperation. Despite ASEAN as a regional institution promote openness and freedom of cyber domain among its members, ASEAN member states taking contradiction policy to its regional institution. This research tries to answer why ASEAN member states take contradiction policy to their regional institution. Utilizing government politic model theory and insecurity dilemma concept, the author argues that insecurity dilemma that faced by ASEAN member states shaping its member states taking an opposite policy of connectivity on cyberspace that regional institution digital masterplan aim for.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alan Collins. 2000. The Security Dilemmas of Southeast Asia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Allison, Graham T. 1971. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, L. Canada: Little, Brown & Company.
ASEAN. 2021. ASEAN DIGITAL MASTERPLAN 2025.
Ayoob, Mohammed. 1995. The Third World Security Predicament: State Making, Regional Conflict, and the International System. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Choucri, Nazli. 2012. Cyberpolitics in International Relations. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Choudhury, Saheli Roy. “Southeast Asia: 40 Million New Internet Users in 2020, Report Finds.” https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/10/southeast-asia-40-million-new-internet-users-in-2020-report-finds.html (March 20, 2021).
Clark, David D., John Wroclawski, Karen R. Sollins, and Robert Braden. 2005. “Tussle in Cyberspace: Defining Tomorrow’s Internet.” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 13(3): 462–75.
Creemers, Rogier. 2020. “China’s Conception of Cyber Sovereignty: Rhetoric and Realization.” http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3532421.
Haggard, Stephan, and Robert R. Kaufman. 2016. “Democratization during the Third Wave.” Annual Review of Political Science 19: 125–44.
Han, Rongbin. 2018. “Contesting Cyberspace in China: Online Expression and Authoritarian Resilience.” Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews 48(4): 673.
Harold, Scott, Martin Libicki, and Astrid Cevallos. 2016. Getting to Yes with China in Cyberspace. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND Corporation.
Heinl, Caitríona H. 2014. “Regional Cybersecurity: Moving Toward a Resilient ASEAN Cybersecurity Regime.” Asia Policy 18(1): 131–59.
Job, Brian, ed. 1992. The Insecurity Dilemma: National Security of Third World States. L. Rienner Publishers.
Lewis, James A. 2010. “Sovereignty and the Role of Government in Cyberspace.” Brown Journal of World Affairs 16(2): 55–65.
Mearsheimer, John J. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W Norton & Company.
Mueller, Milton T. 2012. “China and Global Internet Governance: A Tiger by the Tail.” In Access Contested: Security, Identity, and Resistance in Asian Cyberspace Information Revolution and Global Politics, eds. Ronald Deibert, John Palfrey, Rafal Rohozinski, and Jonathan Zittrain. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 414.
Onsos, Evan. 2018. “Age of Ambition: Chasing Fortune, Truth, and Faith in the New China.” Armstrong Undergraduate Journal of History 8(1): 416.
Ritchie, Jane. 2003. “The Applications of Qualitative Methods to Social Research.” In QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PRACTICE: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers, eds. Jane Ritchie and Jane Lewis. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Schmitt, Michael N., ed. 2017. Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Segal, Adam. 2020. “China’s Vision for Cyber Sovereignty and the Global Governance of Cyberspace.” In An Emerging China-Centric Order: China’s Vision for a New World Order in Practice, ed. Nadège Rolland. Washington: The National Bureau of Asian Research, 85–100. https://www.nbr.org/publication/chinas-vision-for-cyber-sovereignty-and-the-global-governance-of-cyberspace/.
Sørensen, Georg. 2007. “After the Security Dilemma: The Challenges of Insecurity in Weak States and the Dilemma of Liberal Values.” Security Dialogue 38(3): 357–78.
Thomas, Raju G.C. 2003. “What Is Third World Security?” Annual Review of Political Science 6: 205–32.
Tilly, Charles. 1990. Coercion, Capital, and European States: AD 990 - 1990. Oxford: Blackwell Pub.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11445135%5Cnhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16914980%5Cnhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18381770%5Cnhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11322980%5Cnhttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2323975&t.
White House. 2009. “Cyberspace Policy Review.” Security 3: 1–37. http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Cyberspace_Policy_Review_final.pdf.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jgf.2022.002.01.2
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Global Focus
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Publisher:
Department of International Relations, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya
Editorial Address:
Jl. Veteran, Malang 65145
Tel. (+62) 341-575755
Fax. (+62) 341-570038
e-mail : globalfocus@ub.ac.id
website : globalfocus.ub.ac.id
Global Focus is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International