Academic Oration on the 63rd Anniversary of the Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Padjadjaran
Southeast Asia is arguably the most diverse region in the world. Accordingly, rather than addressing the exact same question, the contributors to this volume have — as experts on Southeast Asia-China relations — explored the matters they see as most important and most deserving of exploration and exposure. After the editor’s introduction, the chapters proceed in pairs. Each pair and a closing chapter cover a distinctive theme in Southeast Asia’s interactions with China.
Since the time of Lee Kuan Yew (1923–2015), Singapore’s leaders have refused to infer, merely from the country’s size and composition, a need to appease the People’s Republic of China (PRC). They have remained averse to the notion that little countries should kowtow to big ones, and they firmly reject the idea that their country is somehow racially embedded in a “greater China” whose roads all lead to Beijing.
In October 2017, twenty-two scholars from eight countries attended a workshop titled “ASEAN @ 50, Southeast Asia @ Risk: What should be done?” The workshop was designed to facilitate a frank and creative discussion of policy recommendations, with the intention of providing the resulting proposals to ASEAN member states and other regional powers.
The future of ASEAN is necessarily unknown. Its futures, however, can be guessed with less risk of being wrong. The purpose of this article is not to predict with confidence but to "pandict" with reticence—not to choose one assured future but to scan several that could conceivably occur. Also, what follows is merely a range of possible futures, not the range. The five different ASEANs of the future all too briefly sketched below are meant to be suggestive, but they are neither fully exclusive nor jointly exhaustive. Potentiality outruns imagination.
The future of ASEAN is necessarily unknown. Its futures, however, can be guessed with less risk of being wrong. My purpose here is not to predict with confidence but to “pandict” with reticence—not to choose one assured future but to scan several that could conceivably occur. Also, what follows is merely a range, not the range. The five different ASEANs of the future all too briefly sketched below are meant to be suggestive, but they are neither fully exclusive nor jointly exhaustive. Potentiality outruns imagination.
Admirers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are impressed with the fact that it continues to exist and that an outright war has never broken out between its members. Also often praised is the value to the region of promoting cooperation through the consensual process known as the ‘ASEAN Way’. If ASEAN is a talk shop, these observers say, talking is at least better than fighting.
Scholars at Stanford's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies assess the strategic situation in East Asia to be unsettled, unstable, and drifting in ways unfavorable for American interests. These developments are worrisome to countries in the region, most of which want the United States to reduce uncertainty about American intentions by taking early and effective steps to clarify and solidify U.S. engagement. In the absence of such steps, they will seek to reduce uncertainty and protect their own interests in ways that reduce U.S.
China’s building of infrastructure on land features in the South China Sea is a strategy to gain control over the area incrementally, without triggering actual war. That strategy has, so far, succeeded in large part due to Beijing’s effective use of ambiguity and because fears of unwanted escalation have tended to outweigh fears of Chinese expansion. A recent incident in Indonesian waters involving China’s coast guard is unlikely to cause a significant hardening of Jakarta’s posture toward Beijing.
Writing for YaleGlobal Online, Donald Emmerson examines outcomes of the U.S.-Association for Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summit that took place at Sunnylands in Rancho Mirage, California, between Feb. 15-16, 2016. He says that ASEAN, with its timid stance on the South China Sea, risks irrelevance and Chinese dominance in that area.
In a November 2012 issue brief published by the ASAN Institute for Policy Studies, Donald K. Emmerson examines Asia-Pacific organizations working to promote democracy and human rights in Asia.
He concludes with a discussion about what sort of Asian regional organization would be worth innovating to extend or deepen the reach of democracy in Asia.
In this paper published by the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability, Donald Emmerson discusses the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC), saying: "[The] TAC is a relevant model for a comprehensive agreement on peace and security in Northeast Asia, were such an agreement to become feasible."
Available for download from the Nautilus Institute website.
The United States belongs to various organizations and networks that encompass countries on both sides of the Pacific Ocean. The East Asia Summit (EAS) is not among them. Should the US try to join? This paper answers that question with a qualified yes: Despite formidable difficulties affecting President Obama’s schedule of foreign travel, his administration should try to “ease” the US into the Summit, initially as a guest of the host country. Eventually, pending a review of the EAS’s prior performance and future prospects, the administration may wish to upgrade that status to membershi
No crisis is uniformly global. The suffering and the opportunity that a "global" crisis entails are always unevenly distributed across countries, and unevenly across the population inside any one country. That said, one can nevertheless argue that we-not the old royal "we" but, more presumptuously, the new global "we"-are in January 2009 experiencing the latest of four dramatic changes that major parts of the world have undergone over the last twenty years.
As America struggles to understand Islam and Muslims on the world stage, one concept in particular dominates public discourse: Islamism. References to Islamism and Islamists abound in the media, in think tanks, and in the general study of Islam, but opinions vary on the differences of degree and kind among those labeled Islamists. This book debates what exactly is said when we use this contentious term in discussing Muslim religion, tradition, and social conflict.
Hard Choices offers a most rewarding perspective on how Southeast Asian states straddle the ongoing tensions among three rarely compatible goals—security, democracy, and regionalism. Empirically rich and topically diverse, [the book] is broad in scope and full of deep analytic insights. It will be appreciated well beyond Southeast Asia." — T. J. PEMPEL, University of California, Berkeley
It was meant to be a celebration not a showdown, let alone a showdown that the brutal junta in Burma (Myanmar) would win. In August 2007, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) turned forty. On November 20, to mark the occasion, the heads of government of the association's ten member states-Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam-met in Singapore for the thirteenth ASEAN Summit.
Co-published by the East-West Center, this book originated in a 2004 conference convened by the Southeast Asia Forum (SEAF) at Shorenstein APARC.
This essay was written in September 2007 in an interstitial if not pivotal moment: between the 40th birthday of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Bangkok on 8 August, and the expected announcement of an ASEAN Charter at the 13th summit of the Association in Singapore on 20 November. Future analysts may look back on the 2007 Summit as a threshold event, or mere business as usual, or something in between.
Is the democratization of Indonesia affecting its relations with the US? Yes, but not always in anticipated ways. Indonesia-American relations in Soeharto's time were not always smooth. But the volatility came mainly (not wholly) in the form of NGO and Congressional criticism in the US in response to human rights violations in Indonesia. In Washington DC, the executive branch was not always supportive of the Indonesian government, but many of the occasions when, for example, the State Department criticized events or conditions in Indonesia were prompted by American legislative pressure.
A paper drafted to stimulate discussion at a roundtable on "Old Wine, New Bottles? Regional Frameworks in the Asia-Pacific" at the 47th Strategy for Peace Conference, Stanley Foundation, Airlie Center, Warrenton, Virginia, 19-21 October 2006.