China-Indonesia Joint Statement Controversy: A New Chapter for the South China Sea?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper highlights the recent controversy of the China-Indonesia joint statement in November 2024, which explicitly states “overlapping claims” referring to the maritime boundaries between the two countries in the South China Sea. Previously, Indonesia reaffirmed its stance as the non-claimant state in the South China Sea dispute. With the latest joint statement under Prabowo Subianto’s presidency, a concern was raised on the Indonesian position’s shift in the dispute, which might not only impact its national interest but also Southeast Asia’s regional stability, referring to Indonesia as the primus inter pares in ASEAN. This commentary explores Prabowo Subianto’s speeches and statements on the South China Sea over the past 10 years, during his terms as presidential candidate in 2014 and 2019, defense minister in 2019-24, and the president in 2024-9. The content analysis shows Prabowo’s preference to manage the South China Sea issue within a framework of cooperation instead of conflictual manner, with the possibility of prioritizing bilateral rather than regional approaches. The shift will likely impact the future of border dispute settlement in the South China Sea.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".