Dari Rimland ke Pivot Indo-Pasifik: Geopolitik, Geoekonomi, dan Geostrategi Negara-Negara Asia Tenggara (Studi Komparatif Indonesia, Filipina, Malaysia, dan Singapura)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66914/n8e07c31Keywords:
Asia Tenggara, geopolitik, geoekonomiAbstract
Artikel ini menganalisis bagaimana negara-negara Asia Tenggara mengonversi posisi geografisnya menjadi strategi nasional melalui lensa geopolitik, geoekonomi, dan geostrategi (G3). Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan metode studi pustaka komparatif atas empat kasus, yaitu Indonesia, Filipina, Malaysia, dan Singapura, berdasarkan literatur akademik, putusan hukum internasional, dan dokumen kebijakan kawasan. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa warisan kolonial dan Perang Dingin membentuk kawasan sebagai rimland maritim yang rentan menjadi arena rivalitas kekuatan besar kawasan ini menempati posisi pivot Indo-Pasifik karena menguasai chokepoint utama seperti Selat Malaka ketergantungan ekonomi yang saling terkait memberi peluang sekaligus kerentanan, terutama terhadap instrumen economic statecraft dan pilihan strategis berupa hedging, balancing, atau non-alignment tidak ditentukan oleh geografi semata, melainkan oleh rezim politik domestik. Singapura dengan dominasi partai menjalankan hedging yang terkalibrasi, Malaysia dengan sistem parlementer konsosiasional menjalankan hedging yang menyeimbangkan banyak mitra, Indonesia dengan presidensialisme multipartai mempertahankan otonomi strategis melalui politik bebas aktif, sedangkan Filipina berayun antara akomodasi dan penyeimbangan mengikuti pergantian presiden. Artikel ini menyimpulkan bahwa konsistensi strategi negara kecil dan menengah di Asia Tenggara bergantung pada kapasitas institusi domestik dalam merumuskan kepentingan nasional jangka panjang.
Kata kunci: Asia Tenggara, geopolitik, geoekonomi, geostrategi, hedging
Abstract
This article analyzes how Southeast Asian states convert their geographical position into national strategy through the lens of geopolitics, geo-economics, and geostrategy. Using a qualitative comparative literature review of Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore, it draws on academic works, international legal rulings, and regional policy documents. The findings show that colonial and Cold War legacies shaped the region as a maritime rimland prone to great-power rivalry the region holds a pivotal Indo-Pacific position because it controls key chokepoints such as the Strait of Malacc economic interdependence offers both opportunities and vulnerabilities, particularly to economic statecraf and strategic choices among hedging, balancing, and non-alignment are shaped not by geography alone but by domestic political regimes. Singapore, under dominant-party rule, pursues calibrated hedging; Malaysia, under a consociational parliamentary system, hedges across many partners; Indonesia, under multiparty presidentialism, preserves strategic autonomy through its free-and-active doctrine; and the Philippines oscillates between accommodation and balancing with each change of president. The article concludes that the consistency of small and middle power strategy in Southeast Asia depends on domestic institutional capacity to define long-term national interests.
Keywords: Southeast Asia, geopolitics, geo-economics, geostrategy, hedging
Downloads
References
Acharya, A. (2014). Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the problem of regional order (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Aspinall, E., & Berenschot, W. (2019). Democracy for sale: Elections, clientelism, and the state in Indonesia. Cornell University Press.
Bautista, L., & Candelaria, N. (2025). Tightrope diplomacy: Philippine foreign policy recalibration under Marcos Jr. amid South China Sea tensions and political rifts. In Southeast Asian Affairs 2025. ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.
Blackwill, R. D., & Harris, J. M. (2016). War by other means: Geoeconomics and statecraft.
Harvard University Press.
Cohen, S. B. (2015). Geopolitics: The geography of international relations (3rd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
De Castro, R. C. (2024). The Philippines’ evolving grand strategy in confronting China’s maritime expansion in the South China Sea. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 43(1).
Emmerson, D. K. (1984). “Southeast Asia”: What’s in a name? Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 15(1), 1–21.
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42–79.
Hadiz, V. R., & Robison, R. (2004). Reorganising power in Indonesia: The politics of oligarchy in an age of markets. RoutledgeCurzon.
Huang, C.-H., & Ho, S. (2024). Introduction: Domestic determinants of Southeast Asia’s relations with the United States and China. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 46(1).
Hutchcroft, P. D. (1998). Booty capitalism: The politics of banking in the Philippines. Cornell University Press.
Kuik, C.-C. (2008). The essence of hedging: Malaysia and Singapore’s response to a rising China. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 30(2), 159–185.
Kuik, C.-C. (2024). Explaining hedging: The case of Malaysian equidistance. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 46(1).
Kuik, C.-C. (2016). How do weaker states hedge? Unpacking ASEAN states’ alignment behavior towards China. Journal of Contemporary China, 25(100), 500–514.
Lee, T. (2024). The domestic determinants of hedging in Singapore’s foreign policy.
Contemporary Southeast Asia, 46(1).
Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration. Yale University Press.
Luttwak, E. N. (1990). From geopolitics to geo-economics: Logic of conflict, grammar of commerce. The National Interest, 20, 17–23.
Mackinder, H. J. (1904). The geographical pivot of history. The Geographical Journal, 23(4), 421–437.
Mahan, A. T. (1890). The influence of sea power upon history, 1660–1783. Little, Brown and Company.
Mauzy, D. K., & Milne, R. S. (2002). Singapore politics under the People’s Action Party.
Routledge.
Ó Tuathail, G. (1996). Critical geopolitics: The politics of writing global space. University of Minnesota Press.
Osborne, M. (2016). Southeast Asia: An introductory history (12th ed.). Allen & Unwin.
Permanent Court of Arbitration. (2016). The South China Sea arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China), PCA Case No. 2013-19, Award of 12 July 2016.
Priamarizki, A. (2024). Understanding the domestic determinants of Indonesia’s hedging policy towards the United States and China. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 46(1).
Quilop, R. J. (2024). Consistency amid seeming shifts: Philippine foreign policy between the United States and China. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 46(1).
Riedho, M. R. Z. (2024). Strategi Tiongkok dalam memanfaatkan momentum kebijakan larangan ekspor bijih nikel oleh Pemerintah Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Hubungan Internasional, 20(1).
Rodan, G. (2018). Participation without democracy: Containing conflict in Southeast Asia.
Cornell University Press.
Sidel, J. T. (1999). Capital, coercion, and crime: Bossism in the Philippines. Stanford University Press.
Slater, D. (2010). Ordering power: Contentious politics and authoritarian leviathans in Southeast Asia. Cambridge University Press.
Spykman, N. J. (1944). The geography of the peace. Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Weiss, M. L. (2020). The roots of resilience: Party machines and grassroots politics in Southeast Asia. Cornell University Press.
Wong, P. N. (2025). Toward a futurist approach to hedging strategy in Southeast Asia: Anticipations and strategic decision-making in a Taiwan contingency. Frontiers in Political Science, 7, 1598976. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2025.1598976
Woo-Cumings, M. (Ed.). (1999). The developmental state. Cornell University Press.
Downloads
-
PDF FULL TEXT
Abstract Dilihat : 0 Kali , Download: 0 Kali
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Pasha Fathurilham, Rifan Maulana, Zaki Maulana Abdillah, Elly Nurlia (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Muhammad Pasha Fathurilham

